FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST

CLASS IV - HUBBARD ADVANCED AUDITOR (HAA)
CASE SUPERVISOR COURSE - PART 4/14

**************************************************

This is the Class IV Case Supervisor Course (HAA)
Course Pack as issued and delivered in the 1975 -
1976 time frame.

The contents will be posted separately as part 0 and
repeated in part 1 but will not be included in the
remaining parts to keep the size down.

NOTE: With the following exceptions, all documents
are reproduced exactly as issued.

All italicized or bold characters and underlines
have been omitted from this reproduction. Only 
minor spelling errors have been corrected.

If you have questions about the content of an
individual issue please refer to the Tech or
OEC Volumes (which were posted previously) for 
clarification. 

**************************************************

STATEMENT OF PURPOSE

Our purpose is to promote religious freedom and the Scientology
Religion by spreading the Scientology Tech across the internet.

The Cof$ abusively suppresses the practice and use of
Scientology Tech by FreeZone Scientologists. It misuses the
copyright laws as part of its suppression of religious freedom.

They think that all freezoner's are "squirrels" who should be
stamped out as heritics. By their standards, all Christians,
Moslems, Mormons, and even non-Hassidic Jews would be considered
to be squirrels of the Jewish Religion.

The writings of LRH form our Old Testament just as the writings
of Judiasm form the Old Testament of Christianity.

We might not be good and obedient Scientologists according
to the definitions of the Cof$ whom we are in protest against.

But even though the Christians are not good and obedient Jews,
the rules of religious freedom allow them to have their old
testament regardless of any Jewish opinion.

We ask for the same rights, namely to practice our religion
as we see fit and to have access to our holy scriptures
without fear of the Cof$ copyright terrorists.

We ask for others to help in our fight. Even if you do
not believe in Scientology or the Scientology Tech, we hope
that you do believe in religious freedom and will choose
to aid us for that reason.

Thank You,

The FZ Bible Association - Unit 21

**************************************************



=====================

015. HCOB 26 Nov 1963 A New Triangle, Basic Auditing, Technique,
Case Analysis



HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HC0 BULLETIN OF 26 NOVEMBER 1963
Central Orgs
Franchise
ALL LEVELS
STAR RATING


A NEW TRIANGLE
BASIC AUDITING, TECHNIQUE,
CASE ANALYSIS


All processing can be broken down into three separate parts for any
level of auditing.

These three parts are: (1) BASIC AUDITING (2) TECHNIQUE and (3) CASE
ANALYSIS.

BASIC AUDITING

The handling of the pc as a being, this auditing cycle, the meter
comprise the segment of processing known as Basic Auditing

If an auditor cannot handle this segment or any part of it well,
trouble will develop in the other two segments (technique and case
analysis). When technique and case analysis seem to fail "even when
done by the book" the fault commonly lies in Basic Auditing. One or
more of the five faults elsewhere listed will be present and these
faults effectively prevent any technique or case analysis from working.

Where Scientology "isn't working", the wrong first places to look
are technique and case analysis. The right place to look is Basic
Auditing.

Until an auditor can handle a pc in session easily, handle a meter
smoothly and accurately and is flawless in his auditing cycle, lie
or she should have no hope of making any technique work or of
analyzing any case for anything.

In smooth Basic Auditing lies the open sesame to all cases, for only
then do technique and case analysis function. The gun barrel is Basic
Auditing. Technique and Case Analysis form the Ammunition and sight.
A poor basic auditor using a fine technique is firing ammunition with
no gun. It doesn't go anywhere.

There is a level of Basic Auditing for every level of Scientology. At
the lowest level it is only the ability to sit and listen. It grows in complexity from there up to the fabulous co-ordination of pc, auditing
cycle and meter so flawless that neither auditor nor pc are aware of
the presence of Basic Auditing at all, but only the actions of the
technique and the guidance of case analysis. And between those two
practices of Basic Auditing lie many gradients.

Basic Auditing is the rock on which all gains are built.

TECHNIQUE

The techniques of Scientology are many, spread out over 13 years of
development.


HCOB 26 Nov 1963 - 2 -


A technique is a process or some action that is done by auditor and
pc under the auditor's direction.

The lowest technique is the single co-audit question given by the
supervisor to let the pc Itsa. The highest is the complex listing
of goals and GPMs. 

A technique is a patterned action, invariable and unchanging, composed
of certain steps or actions calculated to bring about tone arm action
and thus better or free a thetan.

There have been thousands of techniques. Less than a hundred, at a
guess, are in common recommended use for the various levels of auditing. 

Techniques have their place in various levels of auditing today
rather than various differences of case.

As cases may be audited only at the level in which they are trained
by modern ruling, and as several techniques exist at each level for
choice out of case analysis, it will be found quite simple to select
a technique and get results with it. Safe auditing and good sense
dictates such selection and classing of techniques, and trouble only
results when some one sells himself out of his level to a high fast
flounder.

Techniques exist in tables and texts for the various levels and it
will be found that these give the best case results applied in that way.

CASE ANALYSIS

Case Analysis establishes two things (a) What is going on with the
case and (b) What should be done with it.

Case Analysis is a new subject to auditors at this time. It is
commonly confused with techniques and the gravest fault is treating
case analysis as only another assessment technique.

There is a level of Case Analysis for every level or class, to compare
with the Basic Auditing and Technique of that class.

My first development in this new segment of processing was Programming.
this is the consecutive techniques or actions a case should have to
get adequate Tone Arm action and achieve a new plateau of ability.

But Case Analysis itself has steps like (a) and (b) above.

There is also an invariable sequence of application in a more advanced
Case Analysis. These steps should be very, very well known by a trained
auditor since case analysis fits into them:

1. Discover what the pc is "sitting in".

2. Have the pc detail what assumptions and, considerations he or she
has had about it; and

3. Identify it fully and correctly.

The "it" above can be as slight as a worry, as bothersome as a Present
Time Problem or as overwhelming as a Goals Problem Mass. Whatever "it"
is the Case-

Analysis steps would be the same.

In the, first step the survey may be very brief. It should certainly
have certainty in it for the pc. It can be very genera!. It can be a part
of a case or a geographical location. The pc could be clear or insane.
The sequence or the 3 steps would be the same.


HCO B 26 November 1963 - 3 - 


The next step (2) gets the lies off, giving TA action and thus clearing
away charge for a more accurate assault in (3). This second step can be
very lengthy as in Level Two or very brief as in OT auditing techniques.
But it must exist when short or long. Otherwise the analysis is heavily
hindered by the lies and these will read on the meter and upset the analysis
or they will cloud the pc's perception on which all Itsa depends. So
the lies must come off in any case analysis. Usually this is quite
permissive and gently done. But it can amount to also pulling missed
withholds. It all depends on the level on which the analysis is being
done and what is being analyzed. This step (2) becomes itself a technique
at lower levels. It is just a spatter and promise at high level auditing.

The third step can be long or short but must always be there. Here,
with the charge gone in (2), the auditor and pc can now identify the
thing much better and the pc can have a final certainty on it. Usually
at lower levels, the certainty is only that it is gone. The familiar
"How do you feel about that problem now?" "What problem?" is a lower
level result of case analysis. At the highest level, "On checking the
meter, I find that is a wrong Item" would be the auditor's final
(3) statement.

So Case Analysis at any level has as its action establishing what the
pc is in, what it has been supposed to be and what it now is (or isn't).

Anything from a habit to a headache could be analyzed in this way. At
the lowest levels it could occupy an intensive, at the highest levels
five minutes.

ARC Break handling has been the most familiar tool of Case Analysis.

Case Analysis handles the momentary or prolonged problem, determines 
the technique to be used, and is always done with Basic Auditing.

An auditor has three hats. One is his Basic Auditor's hat. This he
never takes off. The other two are his technique hat and his case
analysis hat and these he switches back and forth at need.

These are the three segments. Put together well, they make successful
auditing.


L. RON HUBBARD

LRH:dr.rd
Copyright ($) 1963
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

=====================

016. HCOB 8 Oct 1968 Case Supervisor - Folder Handling



HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 8 OCTOBER 1968

Remimeo
Case Supervisor Hat

CASE SUPERVISOR - FOLDER HANDLING

Analyzing Folders

Go back in the folder to the session where the Preclear was
running well and come forward from it doing a folder error summary.

Reviewing Folders

In reviewing a folder, the first thing to do is to look at
the C/S to see if it was done.

Use the Summary Sheet to get the Auditor's attitude.
Use the Auditor's Report Form to get the time of processes.

Read and take all your data from Worksheets and compare it
to and see that C/S was complied with and ensure Standard Tech
was applied.

If you can't read the reports, send it back to have the
Auditor over-print illegible words. Never try to case supervise
(C/S) an illegible worksheet as you'll only run into headaches.

The After Session Examiner's Report, gives you the first clue
of how suspicious you should be in examining the folder and
whether or not auditing reports contain falsities.

Standard Tech

You're never led by anything from departing from Standard
Tech. The only reason it doesn't work is that it hasn't been
applied.

The main question of a Case Supervisor is;

WAS IT APPLIED?

If you follow this exactly, you'll never miss.



LRH:jp:ei
Copyright ($) 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

=====================

017. HCOB 29 July 1969 The "Art" of Case Supervision



HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

Remimeo HCO BULLETIN OF 29 JULY 1969
Dian Chksht
VIII Chksht
Case Supervisors

THE "ART" OF CASE SUPERVISION

One does not in actual fact Case Supervise against results.

Case Supervision is done against the thoroughness and exactness of
technical application.

To give an auditor a well done when he has made a technical flub
(despite a good result on the pc) is to hang the auditor with a win. The
next time he does the same thing he is liable to get a resounding lose.

In looking over folders one C/Ses against Standardness of application.
The tech takes care of the rest.

For a long time, auditing was "what you could get away with." It no
longer is. It is the act of holding a standard. Only in that way does
one get 100% wins.

In assigning what is to be done with a pc or pre-OT, one seeks to keep
the case progressing or winning.

The Case Supervisor's action is to get the case audited as long as
possible! Any impulse to get the case off one's lines will be a losing
one.

Cases progress in exact ratio to the amount of charge gotten off,
They do not progress by magic buttons designed just for that case.

The "sudden" big wins are the result of the accumulated effect of
getting charge off.

It is of course charge of a certain type and that type is contained in
the Case Supervisor's book, in the mechanics of Dianetics and Scientology.

Early on (using Standard Tech) the worse off (more shallow) the case
is, the faster it F/Ns. The pc is reaching no depth. An example is some-
one who cannot get into or run past lives. They F/N almost at once on any
process. This does not mean they are at once "clear" or released. It
means they are like a coiled spring. When you touch them something flies
off.

The Case Supervisor on such a case works hard to keep them running
Dianetics. The task is finding something to audit, not to complete pcs.

When the Dianetics Grade was missed, people F/Ned their way straight
on up to OT VI, still wondering where their headache came from.

This doesn't mean that in Scientology you by-pass F/Ns. It means that
the Case Supervisor prepares the case.

The finance statistic of orgs is assisted by attempts to stretch out
auditing and is harmed by fast brush off "completions".


HCOB 29.7.69 - 2 -


The reputation of the org is also harmed because the field fills up
with shallowly run partially solved cases.

Tech is so fast today that only now can a Case Supervisor work at
attempting to prolong a pc in auditing.

The statistic of an HGC should be the number of successful auditing
hours delivered, not the number of pcs completed.

Therefore the Case Supervisor is alert to the inability or ability of
a pc or pre-OT to go backtrack, to the number of engrams the pc runs per
chain before erasure, to the number of commands given before F/N on a
Scientology process. And by this he can gauge how arduously the case must
be worked on.

For example, on a child, a bruised finger yesterday run as an engram
F/Ns, In Scientology any grade command will also F/N on clearing it. End
result, no real case improvement.

But if you keep at it and at it and at it, gradually gradually the
case runs deeper and deeper into the past and confronts heavier and heavier
incidents.

Then, as it goes along, the case runs faster and faster, requiring far
more "commands per unit of time in session".

Finally the case begins to blow by inspection and, ideally, has what
is known as a "Clear Cognition".

Scientology, dealing with the thetan and considerations, is now able to
function with total bite.

Power and R6EW really get the pc somewhere.

The Clear and OT sections make him fly.

And you have a real OT.

That is the general Case Supervisor plan.

As the number of hours in actual auditing are now under 50 for audited
cases and under another 50 for solo, there is no use at all trying to
solve a case fast.

Solve it standardly.

The Case Supervisor book gives you a lot of things to do for certain
pc characteristics. One tries if possible to do the lot.

Applying the right C/S direction at the right time is only knowing
one's tech.

This is the basic rationale behind C/Sing. It really has no strain.
Only poor auditing can mess it up so you police that hard, do the right
direction at the right time and let tech do the rest.

L. RON HUBBARD
FOUNDER



LBH:ldm
Copyright ($) 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

=====================

018. HCOB 15 Nov 1969 Important, Case Supervision, How it goes
Non-Standard


HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill. Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

Remimeo HCO BULLETIN OF 15 NOVEMBER 1969

Class VIIIs 
Case Supervisors Issue II
Dianetics Checksht
Class VIII Checksht
Interne Chshts all Classes

Important
Case Supervision, How It Goes non-Standard


Probably the No. 1 lesson that had to be learned by a Case Supervisor without
any wiggles or doubts or derails is that he can be (and must not be) driven off
standard tech by false auditing reports.

At least half the failed sessions he gets are false reports!

The auditor has not noted some of the things he did or he has noted things
that did not happen.

The person who falsifies an auditing report usually is the same person who
gets bad results. Naturally.

The report is usually not knowingly false. It does not include the data
as to why the session failed.

This leaves the case supervisor with an impression that standard tech was done
but that it failed. That sends him into a figure-figure and proposing unusual
solutions. This gets him into reviewing reviews, long hours of C/Sing, backlogs
and an area muddied up by "failed cases."

A Case Supervisor has to know his Standard Tech forwards and backwards.

In a correct auditing report of a failed session the answer as to why it failed
is neon light big and glaring. So the Case Supervisor corrects it and corrects the auditor.

But that is only true of about half the failed sessions the Case Supervisor
gets. THE OTHER HALF OF THE FAILED SESSIONS ARE FALSE REPORTS,

Instead of going the route and first getting, inventive and then damning
tech and taking up Yogi, the Case Supervisor MUST realize:

1. That if he himself doesn't know his Dianetics and Scientology cold, he
will certainly never be able to spot errors in its application.

2. That standard tech - Dianetics and Scientology - are invariable in results
and that the only variables are the Case Supervisor and the auditor.

3. That there are no "different" pcs.

4. That 50% of the failed sessions are also false reports if you can't find
in the folder why the session failed.

5. That if you can' t find in the folder why the session failed or the pc
isn't doing well you get the pc asked about the session and get data as to why it failed. (The answers and outnesses will amaze you.)

6. That when the above fully dawn on a Case Supervisor he becomes totally
successful.


HCOB 15.11.69 -2-


There is a sort of breakthrough a Case Supervisor makes, a sort of crisis he
passes though where the above points suddenly become glaringly clear to him.
After that he is a hard-eyed, uncompromising precisionist that nothing gets by
and whose field area gets results - results - results and tech and stats soar.

It doesn't take too much. Given a command of the tech, Dianetics and
Scientology, he can spot easily in the worksheets why a failed session went
adrift send it to review to be remedied and send the auditor to cramming.

But the session where the pc left session with "F/N VGIs 2.0" and arrives at
Examiner with "needle tight, 4.3, Indicators poor" and in which all seems usual
and standard.....! Hey! That's a false auditing report. It doesn't mean standard
tech doesn't work It means a false worksheet. You haven't got the data needed to
handle or do the next C/S.

So you have somebody else ask the pc what happened in that session and get it
written down and get the folder back.

Man, it would knock over an elephant. Some of the things you get back.
"Well he was reading off items I guess but I couldn't hear him....." "I asked
him not to shout and he said 'I'm the auditor not you'". "I kept trying to tell
him I was exterior...." "He wouldn't accept the withhold. He said it wasn't a
withhold because he'd heard it from my .wife....". "I had to keep telling him what the next command was...." "But it wasn't a headache that I was trying to get handled. I was vomiting during most of the session.....".

Boy, the world of Never-Never-Never that lies behind those reports where you
can't find the reason!

Suddenly, as I say, the Case Supervisor makes his own personal breakthrough.
His, "I wonder what's really wrong with this pc...." turns into, ''Auditor to cramming to Review R3R commands and TR 104. Pc to review to Fly a rud or GF to F/N. Assess Auditor, Auditors, Commands....."

Oh, you say, we don't have an Examiner in our Franchise - listen, you better
teach your receptionist to do an Examiner form - Yes, but we don't have a Case
Supervisor or cramming - brother, are you so in love with the buck that you'll salt out your whole area with failed cases just to get high pay on low stats? Auditing is a TEAM action. If you can't do it as a team action It's not Standard admin to begin with and sure as shooting your practice or your franchise will fail in the long run,.

Maybe that's the first break through the Case Supervisor makes. To realize
auditing actions are team actions.

But not to get off the rails, IF YOU CAN'T FIND THE FAILURE IN THE FOLDER
GET THE PC ASKED FOR YOU'RE LOOKING AT A FALSE IF ONLY INCOMPLETE WORKSHEET.

L. RON HUBBABD
FOUNDER

LRH:re
Copyright ($) 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

=====================

019. HCOB 23 Aug 1971 C/S Series 1 Auditors Rights



HUBBARD COMMUNICATION'S OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

Remimeo HCO BULLETIN OF 23 AUSUST 1971
All Auditors (HCOB 24 May 1970 Revised)
C/Ses
SHSBC
Acad Level IV
Class VIIIs
HGCs
Class VIII /Sheet
Class VI /Sheet C/S Series No. 1
Class III /Sheet
C/S Course /Sheet
HSST
Internes

AUDITORS RIGHTS

(Revised to update and delete the 0/R
List on Pg 2 and add Auditing over out
ruds. All changes are in script type.)

AUDITOR RESPONSIBILITY FOR C/Ses

The responsibility of an auditor who receives a Case
Supervisor direction (C/S) of what to audit on a pc is NOT
discharged of his responsibility as an auditor.

THE AUDITOR HAS A SERIES OF RESPONSIBILITIES THAT ARE
PART OF EVERY C/S HE GETS TO AUDIT.

ACCEPTING THE PC

No auditor is required to accept a specific pc just
because the pc is assigned to him.

If an auditor does not believe he can help that particular
pc or if he dislikes auditing that particular pc the auditor
has a right to refuse to audit that pc.

The auditor must state why. 

The Case Supervisor, Director of Processing or Director
of Review, nor any of their seniors, may not discipline the
auditor for refusing to audit a particular pc.

An auditor who refuses to audit his quota of hours or
sessions is of course subject to action.

Thus refusing to audit a particular pc, so long as one
is not refusing to audit other pcs, is not actionable.

"I do not wish to audit this pc because ________. I am
willing to audit other pcs", is the legal auditor statement
in the matter*

Some pcs get a bad name with some auditors, some don't
appreciate the auditing, some conflict with a particular
auditor's own personality. There are such instances. It
does not mean certain pcs cannot be helped by others.


HCO B 25.8.71 - 2 -


It is also true that an auditor who dislikes a pc may
not do a good job so the rule also has a practical side to it.

One auditor disliked young men and did a bad job on
them. Another disliked old ladies and chopped them up in
session. One pc had messed up several Scientologists and
couldn't find anyone to audit him at all.

We are not auditing people to make amends to the world.

Thus an auditor has a right to reject or accept the pcs
he is given.

ACCEPTING A C/S

When the auditor gets a C/S to do on a case and if he
thinks it is not the correct thing to do he has the right to
reject the C/S for that pc and require another one he can
agree to.

The auditor does not have the right to start doing a
C/S and change it during the session except as noted below.

The. auditor may N0T C/S in the auditing chair while auditing the
pc. If he has NO Case. Supervisor. at all the Auditor still audits from
a C/S. He writes the C/S before session and adheres to it in session.
To do something else and not follow the. C/S is called "C/Sing in the.
chain." and is very poor form as it leads to Q. and A.

STALE DATED C/S

A C/S that is a week or two old or a repair (Progress) Pgm that
is a month or two old are dynamite.

This is called a "Stale Dated Pgm" or a "State Dated C/S" meaning
it is too old to be valid.

It should have been done sooner. The pc of last week when the
C/S was written may have been well and. happily employed but a week later
may have headaches and reprimand from the boss.

It is dangerous to accept a repair {Progress) Pgm if it is old.

The. auditor who sees his C/S is old and sees the pc has Bad
Indicators is justified in demanding a fresh C/S giving his reasons
why.

A program written in January may be completely out of date in
June.. Who knows what may have happened in between.

Use fresh C/Ss and fresh Pgms.

State dates only occur in poorly run backlogged Divisions anyway.
The real remedy is reorganize and hire more and better auditors.


HCO B 23.8.71 - 3 -


ENDING THE SBSSIQN

When the C/S he has is proving unworkable during the
session, the auditor has a right to end the session and send
the folder to the C/S.

Ending the session is totally up to the auditor.

If the auditor just doesn't complete an action that
was producing TA and could be completed it is of course a
flunk. Such a case is just not running a basic engrain the
one more time through that would bring the TA down and give
a proper end phenomena. This and similar actions would be an
auditor error.

The judgement here is whether or not the auditor's action
is justified in ending the session.

Even though he may have made an error, the auditor
cannot be blamed for the ending off of the session as that
is totally up to him. He can be given a flunk for the
error.

AUDITING OVER OUT RUDS

Auditing a pc on something else whose ruds are out is a MAJOR
AUDITING ERROR.

Even if the C/S omits "Fly a rud" or "fly Ruds" this does not
justify the auditor from auditing the pc over out ruds.

The auditor can do one of two things: He can Fly all ruds or he
can return the folder and request ruds be flown.

The DIANETIC AUDITOR is not excused from auditing over out ruds
and in an HGC must be specially cautioned not to do so but return the
folder for a new C/S. Better still he should learn to fly ruds.

INABILITY TO FLY RUDS

If an auditor cannot get a rud to F/N, cannot get any
rud to F/N, he is justified in starting a Green Form.

The auditor solution to no F/N on ruds is to do a G/F.
whether the C/S said to or not.

This is an expected action.

It is understood the auditor would use Suppress and
False in trying to fly ruds.

SESSIONS FAR APART

When a pc has not had a session for some time, or when a pc gets
sessions days apart RUDS MUST BE FLOWN. Otherwise the pc will get audited
over out-Ruds. This can develop mental mass.


HCO B 23.8.71 - 4 -


Optimum session scheduling is a series of sessions or a whole program
done in a block of sessions closet together. This prevents the world from
throwing the pcs ruds out between sessions.

Giving sessions far apart barely keeps up with life. The auditing
time is absorbed in patching life up.

Rapid gain gets above life's annoyances and keeps the pc there.

UNREADING ITEMS

When an item the auditor has been told to run doesn't
read on the meter, even when the auditor puts in Suppress
and Invalidate on it, the auditor MUST NOT do anything with
the item no matter what the C/S said.

It is expected he will see if it reads and use Suppress
and Invalidate on it. And if it still doesn't read he will
be expected NOT to run it.

LISTS

When an auditor whose C/S told him to list "Who or what
or any list question finds that the list question
does not read, the auditor MUST NOT list it.

When doing a list ordered by the C/S it is assumed that
the auditor will test it for read before listing and that he
will NOT list an unreading question. (A read is an actual
fall, not a tick or a stop.)

LIST TROUBLE

When an auditor has trouble doing a list and getting an
item it is expected he will use a Prepared List like L4B to
locate the trouble and handle it.

As it is very hard on a pc to mess up a list it is expected
the auditor will handle the situation then and there with no
further C/S directions.

HIGH TA

When the auditor sees the TA is high at session start
yet the C/S says to "Fly a rud" or run a chain, the AUDITOR
MUST NOT TRY TO FLY A RUD and he must not start on a chain.

Trying to bring a TA down with ARC Brks or ruds is very
hard on a pc as ARC Breaks aren't the reason TAs go up.

Seeing a high TA at start the Dianetic Auditor or Scn
auditor up to Class II does not start the session but sends
the folder back to the C/S and for a higher class auditor to
do.


HCO B 23.8.71 - 5 -


Seeing a high TA at start the Scientology auditor (Class
III or above) (a) checks for exteriorization in a recent
session and if so the session is ended and the C/S is asked for an
"Interiorization Rundown" (b) if the pc has had an Interior-
ization Rundown the auditor asks the C/S for permission to do a "C/S
Series 53" or. a Hi-lo TA assessment or whatever the C/S indicates. The
Int RD may have been (usually is) overrun and needs rehab or correction
and it is usual to check it - it is included in a "C/S 53" and a Hi Lo
TA.

These actions are expected of the auditor even when not
stated in the C/S.

GOING ON HOPING

When a case is running badly session to session the LAST thing
you do is go on hoping, either in auditing or C/Sing.

"Let's try _____," "Then this" "Then this" is not going to
solve the case.

YOU GET DATA. You can get data by a White form (PC Assessment
Form). You can get data from a GF fully assessed (Method 5). you can
get data by 2 way comm on various subjects. You can hove the D of P
Interview and get answers. You can even ask his mother.

You look for case errors. You study the folder back to where the
pc ran well and then come forward and you'll find the. error every time.

DO NOT JUST GO ON SESSION AFTER FAILED SESSION HOPING. That's
pure idiocy.

You. get data! from prepared lists, from life, from the pc, from
the folder.

FIND THE BUG:

Ah, good Lord, he is a Pinkerton Agent sworn to secrecy! He does
yogi exercises after every session. He was tried for murder when he
was 16 and nobody has run the engram of it.

Various auditors ran the same engram chain four times.

An auditor ran Int RD twice.

After Power she had her baby and nobody ran the delivery.

He doesn't like to talk but is a "Grade Zero!"

A dozen dozen reasons can exist.

An auditor does NOT let a C/S C/S hopefully. He refuses the
C/Ss until an Folder Error Summary is done and the bug found.

THINGS DONE TWICE

By carelessness the same rundowns can be called for twice and done
twice or even more.

A Folder. Summary inside the front cover must exist and must
be kept up.


HCO B 23.8.71 - 6 -


Over it there must be a program on which the case is being audited.
But just because its covered, never neglect entering a session and what
was run on the Folder Summary (FS).•

If Hold it still is ordered, see if it was run before.
Don't let major Rundowns be done twice.

DIANETIC ITEMS must NEVER be run twice. Dianetic lists must not
be scattered through a folder. Bring them together and keep them
together and being brought forward.

COPY

Don't copy Dianetic lists or worksheets from notes or items from
lists.

Keep all admin neat and in the original form.
Copying makes errors possible.

RUDS GOING OUT

When the ruds go out during the session the auditor
recognizes the following.

Pc Critical = W/H from auditor

PC Antagonistic = BPC in session

No TA = Problem

Tired = Failed Purpose or no sleep

Sad = ARC Break

Soaring TA = Overrun or Protest

Dope Off = By Passed F/N or not enough sleep

No Interest = Out Ruds or no interest in the first place

An auditor who isn't sure what it is but runs into trouble
with the pc (except on lists which he handles at once always)
is smart to end off the session quickly, write down the full
observation and get it to the C/S.

The auditor who is an old hand and knows what he is looking
at as per above scale (and the C/S the C/S would give) handles
it promptly.

Pc Critical = W/H = pull the W/H.

Pc antagonistic = BPC = assess proper list (such as L1B)
and handle.

No TA (or case gain) = Problem = locate the problem.

Tired a no sleep or failed Purpose = check which it is
and handle.

Sad = ARC Brk = locate and handle, Itsa earlier Itsa.

[continued in 04b]