・ In the existing sentences, the relation between paragraph 5.1.1 and 5.1.2 is not clear. As far as I understand, cargoes should be trimmed as requested by the cargo information, basically, In any circumstance of doubt, cargo should be trimmed reasonably level to the boundaries of the cargo space. Taking these issues into consideration, the sentence proposed above is appropriate for paragraph 5.1.1.
Re: Section 5.1.2 - Trimming procedure, Specific precautions
UK Comment No.15
(54) I agree with the deletion of paragraph 5.1.2.
Re: Section 5.2.2 - New paragraph proposed by the UK
UK Comment No.16
(55) The new sentence on carriage of coal cargoes by Multi-deck ships can be included as paragraph 5.2.2.3, as proposed by the UK.
Re: Section 7.1 - Cargo shift
Thank you very much for re-writing.
Re: Section 7.1.2 - Cargo shift
UK Comment No.17
UK Comment No.18
(56) I propose the following amendments:
Re: Section 7.1.3 - Cargo shift
(57) I propose the following amendments:
"(1) when the cargo contains very small particles, the movement of the particles is restricted by cohesion and water pressure does not increase."
Re: Section 7.1.4 - Cargo shift
(58) I propose the following amendments, because the appendix A will be deleted:
Re: Section 8.3 - Cargoes which may liquefy: test procedures
UK Comment No.19
(59) I agree with to bring this issue to DSC 6.
Re: Section 9.2.2.1 - Class of hazard
(60) I propose the following text, i.e., the text in the IMDG Code:
"Cargoes which, under conditions encountered in transport, are readily combustible or may cause or contribute to fire through friction; self-reactive substances which are liable to undergo a strongly exothermic reaction; solid desensitized explosives which may explode if not diluted sufficiently."
Re: Section 9.2.2.2 to 9.2.2.6 and 9.2.2.8 - Class of hazard
(61) I agree with the sentences proposed by Canada.
Re: Section 9.3 - Identification
UK Comment No.20
(62) I agree with the deletion of paragraph 9.3 and inclusion of the recommendation on the usage of BCSN and PSN in section 4.1. Regarding the comment by the UK on paragraph 9.3.4, I am of the opinion that alternative names of a cargo can be used in addition to BCSN. Regarding the comment by the UK on paragraph 9.3.5, this paragraph can be inserted after 9.1.3, as a new paragraph 9.1.4, including the recommendation on the declaration of UN number or BC number for example as follows (c.f. comment No.47 and 48):
Re: Section 9.4.3 and 9.4.4 - Stowage and segregation requirement
UK Comment No.21
