Agree with Tao Yang.

The radical of 𥦗 is 穴 while the radical of ⿱宀总 is 宀, which means the change is important enough.

Please provide some evidences to prove " it is common to write 穴 (⿱宀八/⿱宀儿) as ⿱宀丷 in the hand writing".

Representing Center for Toponym Research of Sichuan International Studies University, we disagree that IRG decided to unify these two ideographs with no solid evidence provided. But if this is IRG's final decision, we will respect it.

There is a terminology "垛柱" in architecture:

And "垛" has the meaning of "a pile of sth.", so using "垛" to represent a cylindrical thing is resonable.
Then in folk document, "垛" is simplified to “朵”, which later becomes ⿱夭丨.

So ⿱夭丨 is a variant of 朵, which is not congnate with 𠂚 (U+2009A) or 𡗘（U+215D8）.

add a ucv of ⿱冖畨 and 番?

They are clearly distinguished in a book named 《同字符合体字汇》：
Page11:

Page35:

So they should be disunified.

Maybe adding a ucv of 𡧱 and 害 is better.

《顺昌县地名志》P62：


The pronounciation of ⿰土富 is fù, which is absolutely not cognate with ⿰土冨（a variant of 盐）

Agree with Andrew #4528.

建湖县地名委员会：江苏省建湖县地名志，P96

Luckily, I get one copy of the book and scan it myself. It is very clear that the character is ⿰禾岙：

The zoomed picture:

and page 450 of the same book:

Please click the evidence and zoom the page, then there is a clearer image:

黔西南日报，2009年10月1日第36版

http://www.qxnrb.com/page/1/2009-10-03/06/62811254320639140.pdf

The map of 堆龙德庆县， in 《堆龙德庆县志》，北京：中国藏学出版社，2010年7月

And a clearer image of the map

山西省地名委员会办公室：山西省行政区划与自然村标准地名手册 长治市，1987年12月，P348

It's 日, not 目.

陆丰文史 第九辑，p130

I think it's very clear.

The evidence posted is from
江西省公安厅一处 编纂：《江西方言土语汇集》第五册，1991年3月，P224
⿱十八 is a common character used widely in the Sourth of China.
Another evidence:
江苏省公安厅江苏方言总汇编写委员会：江苏方言总汇 上卷，北京：中国文联出版公司，1998年9月，P1860

江西省公安厅一处 编纂：《江西方言土语汇集》第六册，1991年9月，P139

It doesn't matter if it is in 八辅.

湖北省崇阳县地名领导小组：崇阳县地名志，1982年12月，P481

中国文字改革委员会汉字处：福建 广东 广西地名生僻字表，1984年10月，P10

寿宁县地名办公室：寿宁县地名录，1981年12月，P59

只恐双溪舴艋舟，载不动许多愁。
——李清照《武陵春》

The Ningpo Syllabary（宁波方言音节），P28

From 《化学阐原》，民国上海同文馆出版

From 《化学阐原》，民国上海同文馆出版

From 《化学阐原》，民国上海同文馆出版

The glyph should be changed accordingly.

From 《化学阐原》，民国上海同文馆出版

From 《化学阐原》，民国上海同文馆出版

I believe this character should be 𬒘（U+2C498）

化学原质新表(附表)，《亚泉杂志》1900 年，第1期，P3

The IDS and glyph should changed accordingly.

化学原质大同表，《商务报》，1900 年第10期，P6

化学原质新表(附表)，《亚泉杂志》1900 年，第1期，P3

From 《化学阐原》，民国上海同文馆出版

The posted evidence is 王琳. 近现代化学元素名称研究[D].辽宁师范大学,2015,P21-22


李丽：近代化学译著中的化学元素词研究，北京：中央民族大学出版社，2012年6月，P44

As above.

From 《化学阐原》，民国上海同文馆出版

汉印文字征·卷十 P1

FYI, this is a 钞本 I found a few days before, which may be not reliable enough. But maybe they can all be used as each other.

笹原宏之：日本的汉字，新星出版社，2019年，P41

《日華對譯福州語》

Suggest pending for further investigation. This missing stroke is kind of 避讳（taboo character）. However, the taboo character may be more frequently used because the gods are always in the sky. So we'd better involve an expert of Taoist characters to decide which one to keep.

Suggest pending for further investigation.

Suggest pending for further investigation.

The character contains ☷ （U+2637，坤卦） which is not a CJKUI. So this character should not be encoded.

Suggest pending for further investigation. “离旨火天尊胜” is a fixed word.

化元律魄星飞泽（化元律魄星飛澤）is also a fixed word.

The Ningpo Syllabary, P55, the shape is better to be 工 on the bottom according to the evidence provided by UK.

Wrongly postponed.

The character appears in a fomal administrative map and is cited by another published book, which means it should be encoded even it's "wrong". What's more, characters actually used by people should not always satisfy academic facts. They can vary instead.

Agree with Andrew.