> You probably always want this one to win..

I disagree, the idea is that if you have a stash number, the lbfc value can be inferred from this (i.e. overriding any manual assignment from any other rules).  This is what was desired and achieved by this PR.

Hence, I have removed the two existing manual STASH to lbfc translations as they now exist in the new translation table and as mentioned above, should take priority over any other translation to lbfc (all other rules are simply best guesses for populating lbfc).

> I think ideally the other rules for lbfc (lines 64-109) are also a problem, and should probably be just retired in favour of the one above this

I have already added a comment to indicate that these should be removed and put into the CF_TO_LBFC table: `# NOTE: The following rules shold be added to the CF_TO_LBFC table`, however this is beyond the scope of this PR.