FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST CLASS IV - HUBBARD ADVANCED AUDITOR (HAA) CASE SUPERVISOR COURSE - PART 14/14 ************************************************** 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 ************************************************** ===================== 089. HCOB 24 Apr 1972 C/S Series 79 - PTS Interview HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 24 APRIL 1972 ISSUE I Remimeo D of P Auditors PTS Pack C/S Series 79 Ethics Officers Expanded Dianetics Series 5 PTS INTERVIEWS (Reference HCO B 16 Apr 72 C/S Series 76.) Interviews to discover a PTS condition are done on a meter with all reads marked. The Interview asks (a) about persons who are hostile or antagonistic to the pc (b) about groups that are anti-Scientology (c) about people who have harmed the pc (d) about things that the pc thinks are suppressive to the pc (e) about locations that are suppressive to the pc and about past life things and beings suppressive to the pc. In doing the Interview the Interviewer must realize that a sick person is PTS. There are no sick people who are not PTS to someone or a group or something somewhere. A somewhat suppressive pc will find the good hate suppressive. This does not relieve his condition. He is PTS to SP people, groups, things or locations, no matter how SP he is. He can have been audited by someone he knew in an earlier life and who goofed the session. A few auditors have since been declared. Not because they goofed but because they were SP. However, some PTS pc will make trouble for good people because that is what PTS means (Potential Trouble Source). So do not buy all the good people he is PTS to. Further, when you do get the person or group or thing or location the PTS person will F/N VGI and begin to get well. The PTS condition is actually a problem and a mystery and a withdrawal so it is sometimes hard to find and has to be specially processed (3 S&Ds) to locate it. Usually it is quite visible. Don't have a sick, roller coaster pc appear for Interview and then say "not PTS". It 's a false report. It only means the Interviewer did not find it. The pc sometimes begins to list in such an Interview and such an Interview where a wrong item is found has to be audited to complete the list or find the right item. (See C/S Series 78 HCO B 20 Apr 72, Issue II.) HCO B 24.4.72 -2- Issue I So Interview worksheets are VITAL. The Interview Should end on an F/N. The Interview is followed by the Ethics action of HCO P/L 5 April 72 or other Ethics actions such as handling or disconnection and posting as called for in policy. An Interviewer has to use good TRs and operate his meter properly and know 2 way comm and PTS tech. Some Interviewers are extremely successful. Such Interviews and handling count as auditing hours. When properly done, plus good auditing on the PTS RD, well people result. L. RON HUBBARD FOUNDER LRH:mes Copyright ($) 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ===================== 090. LRH ED 241 INT 22 July 1974 - Potential Trouble Sources (original color flash blue on white) EXECUTIVE DIRECTIVE FROM L. RON HUBBARD LRH ED 241 INT Date 22 July 1974 Telex: 220703R To: All Staffs GO A/G'S HAS EO'S D of P'S From: RON Subject: Potential Trouble Sources Ref: PL 5 April 72 Issue I HCOB 10 August 73 As the actual tech of PTS is not well understood or used: 1. No staff member may be dismissed for being PTS. Any staff member previously dismissed as PTS must be restored to staff. 2. A comm ev or condition may be ordered on any staff member refusing or failing to handle per abv refs. 3. No HGC pc may be routed off lines as PTS but must be handled by the Auditor using above references. 4. Only when the org has a graduate of GO justice course on post may 3 above be relaxed and only then when PTS are actually being handled by him. PTSNESS is actually a PTP and causes rollercoaster as it is difficult to audit over a PTP or work either. But it isn,t all that horrible. And it can be handled, usually easily. (SEAL affixed to original) Love Ron L RON HUBBARD LRH: rb ===================== 091. HCOB 10 Aug 1973 PTS Handling HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex Remimeo HCO BULLETIN OF 10 AUGUST 1973 A/Guardians HCO Secs E/Os MAAs Tech Secs Ds of P PTS Pack PTS HANDLING (PTS = Potential Trouble Source) There are two stable data which anyone has to have, understand and KNOW ARE TRUE in order to obtain results in handling the person connected to suppressives. These data are: 1. That all illness in greater or lesser degree and all foul ups stem directly and only from a PTS condition. 2. That getting rid of the condition requires three basic actions: A. Discover B. Handle or disconnect. Persons called upon to handle PTS people can do so very easily, far more easily than they believe. Their basic stumbling block is thinking that there are exceptions or that there is other tech or that the two above data have modifiers or are not sweeping. The moment a person who is trying to handle PTSs gets persuaded there are other conditions or reasons or tech, he is at once lost and will lose the game and not obtain results. And this is very too bad because it is not difficult and the results are there to be obtained. To turn someone who may be PTS over to an auditor just to have him mechanically audited may not be enough. In the first place this person may not have a clue what is meant by PTS and may be missing all manner of technical data on life and may be so overwhelmed by a suppressive person or group that he is quite incoherent. Thus just mechanically doing a process may miss the whole show as it misses the person's understanding of why it is being done. A PTS person is rarely psychotic. But all psychotics are PTS if only to themselves. A PTS person may be in a state of deficiency or pathology which prevents a ready recovery, but at the same time he will not fully recover unless the PTS condition is also handled. For he became prone to deficiency or pathological illness because he was PTS. And unless the condition is relieved, no matter what medication or nutrition he may be given, he might not recover and certainly will not recover permanently. This seems to indicate that there are "other illnesses or reasons for illness besides being PTS". To be sure there are deficiencies and illnesses just as there are accidents and injuries. But strangely enough the person himself precipitates them because being PTS predisposes him to them. In a more garbled way, the medicos and nutritionists are always talking about "stress"' causing illness. Lacking HCOB 10.8.73 - 2 - full tech they yet have an inkling that this is so because they see it is somehow true. They cannot handle it. Yet they recognize it, and they state that it is a senior situation to various illnesses and accidents. Well, we have the tech of this in more ways than one. What is this thing called "stress"? It is more than the medico defines it - he usually says it comes from operational or physical shock and in this he has too limited a view. A person under stress is actually under a suppression on one or more dynamics. If that suppression is located and the person handles or disconnects the condition diminishes. If he also has all the engrams and ARC Breaks, problems, overts and withholds audited out triple flow and if ALL such areas of suppression are thus handled, the person would recover from anything caused by "stress". Usually the person has insufficient understanding of life or any dynamic to grasp his own situation. He is confused. He believes all his illnesses are true because they occur in such heavy books! At some time he was predisposed to illness or accidents. When a serious suppression then occurred he suffered a precipitation or occurrence of the accident or illness, and then with repeated similar suppressions on the same chain, the illness or tendency to accidents became pro- longed or chronic. To say then that a person is PTS to his current environment would be very limited as a diagnosis. If he continues to do or be something to which the suppressive person or group objected he may become or continue to be ill or have accidents. Actually the problem of PTS is not very complicated. Once you have grasped the two data first given, the rest of it becomes simply an analysis of how they apply to this particular person. A PTS person can be markedly helped in three ways: (a) gaining an understanding of the tech of the condition (b) discovering to what or to whom he is PTS. (c) handling or disconnecting. Someone with the wish or duty to find and handle PTSs has an additional prior step: He must know how to recognize a PTS and how to handle them when recognized. Thus it is rather a waste of time to engage in this hunt unless one has been checked out on all the material on suppressives and PTSs and grasps it without misunderstoods. In other words the first step of the person is to get a grasp of the subject and its tech. This is not difficult to do; it may be a bit more difficult to learn to run an E-meter HCOB 10.8.73 - 3 - and considerably more difficult to learn how to list for items, but there again this is possible and is much easier than trying to grope around guessing. With this step done, a person has no real trouble recognizing PTS people and can have success in handling them which is very gratifying and rewarding. Let us consider the easiest level of approach: i) Give the person the simpler HCOBs on the subject and let him study them so that he knows the elements like "PTS" and "Suppressive". He may just cognite right there and be much better. It has happened. ii) Have him discuss the illness or accident or condition, without much prodding or probing, that he thinks now may be the result of Suppression. He will usually tell you it is right here and now or was a short time ago and will be all set to explain it (without any relief) as stemming from his current environment or a recent one. If you let it go at that he would simply be a bit unhappy and not get well as he is discussing usually a late lock that has a lot of earlier material below it. iii) Ask when he recalls first having that illness or having such accidents. He will at once begin to roll this back and realize that it has happened before. You don't have to be auditing him as he is all too willing to talk about this in a most informal manner. He will get back to some early this-lifetime point usually. iv) Now ask him who it was. He will usually tell you promptly, And, as you are not really auditing him and he isn't going backtrack and you are not trying to do more than key him out, you don't probe any further. v) You will usually find that he has named a person to whom he is still connected! So you ask him whether he wants to handle or disconnect. Now as the sparks will really fly in his life if he dramatically disconnects and if he can't see how he can, you persuade him to begin to handle on a gradient scale. This may consist of imposing some slight discipline on him such as requiring him to actually answer his mail or write the person a pleasant good roads good weather note or to realistically look at how he estranged them. In short what is required in the handling is a low gradient. All you are trying to do is MOVE THE PTS PERSON FROM EFFECT OVER TO SLIGHT GENTLE CAUSE. vi) Check with the person again, if he is handling, and coach him along, always at a gentle good roads and good weather level and no H E and R (Human Emotion and Reaction) if you please. That is a simple handling. You Can get complexities such as a person being PTS to an unknown person in his immediate vicinity that he may have to find before he can handle or disconnect. You can find people who can't remember more than a few years back. You can find any- thing you can find in a case. But simple handling ends HCOB 10.8.73 - 4 - when it looks pretty complex. And that's when you call in the auditor. But this simple handling will get you quite a few stars in your crown. You will be amazed to find that while some of them don't instantly recover, medication, vitamins, minerals will now work when before they wouldn't. You may also get some instant recovers but realize that if they don't you have not failed. The auditor can do "3 S&Ds" after this with much more effect as he isn't working with a completely uninformed person. "3 S&Ds" only fail because of wrong items or because the auditor did not then put in triple rudiments on the items and then audit them out as engrams triple flow. A being is rather complex. He may have a lot of sources of suppression. And it may take a lot of very light auditing to get him up to where he can do work on suppressives since these were, after all, the source of his overwhelm. And what he did to THEM might be more important than what they did to HIM but unless you unburden HIM he may not get around to realizing that. You can run into a person who can only be handled by Expanded Dianetics. But you have made an entrance and you have stirred things up and gotten him more aware and just that way you will find he is more at cause. His illness or proneness to accidents may not be slight. You may succeed only to the point where he now has a chance, by nutrition, vitamins, minerals, medication, treatment, and above all, auditing, of getting well. Unless you jogged this condition, he had no chance at all: for becoming PTS is the first thing that happened to him on the subject of illness or accidents. Further, if the person has had a lot of auditing and yet isn't progressing too well, your simple handling may all of a sudden cause him to line up his case. So do not underestimate what you or an auditor can do for a PTS. And don't sell PTS tech short or neglect it. And don't continue to transfer or push off or even worse tolerate PTS conditions in people. You CAN do something about it. And so can they. L. RON HUBBARD FOUNDER LRH:nt Copyright ($) 1973 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED This is Reproduced and issued to you by The Publications Organization, U. S. ===================== 092. HCOB 15 Dec 1968R L4BR - For Assessment of ALL Listing Errors HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 15 DECEMBER 1968 REVISED (Amends HCO Bulletin of 9 January 1968 List L4A) (ITEM 6 CORRECTED 12 FEBRUARY 1969) Remimeo (Amended 8 August 1970) (Amended 18 March 1971) (Revised 2 June 72) L4BR FOR ASSESSMENT OF ALL LISTING ERRORS ASSESS THE WHOLE LIST [METHOD 5) THEN TAKE Biggest reads or BDs and handle. Then clean up the list. PC'S NAME __________________________________________ DATE ____________ AUDITOR _________________________________________ 1. DID YOU FAIL TO ANSWER THE LISTING QUESTION? (If it reads, find out what question, clear the question noting whether it reads, if so, list it, find the item and give it to the pc.) 2. WAS THE LIST UNNECESSARY? (If it reads, indicate BPC and indicate that it was an unnecessary action.) 2A. DID THE QUESTION HAVE NO CHARGE ON IT? (Indicate.) 2B. WERE YOU ASHAMED TO CAUSE AN UPSET? (L1C after list corrected.) 2C. WERE YOU AMAZED TO REACT THAT WAY? (Same as lB.) 2D. THE QUESTION HAD ALREADY BEEN LISTED BEFORE. (Indicate rehab . ) 2E. YOU HAD NO INTEREST IN THE QUESTION? (Indicate that the auditor missed that it didn't read.) 3. WAS THE ACTION DONE UNDER PROTEST? (If it reads, handle by itsa earlier similar itsa.) 4. IS A LIST INCOMPLETE? (If reads, find out what list and complete it, give the pc his item.) 5. HAS A LIST BEEN LISTED TOO LONG? (If so, find what list and get the item off from it by nulling with suppress, the nulling question being: "On has anything been suppressed?" for each item on the overlong list. Give the pc his item.) 6. HAVE WE TAKEN THE WRONG ITEM OFF A LIST? (If this reads, put in Suppress and Invalidated on the list and null as in 5. above and find the right item and give to the pc.) HCOB 15.12.68R - 2 Revised 2.6.72 7. HAS A RIGHT ITEM BEEN DENIED YOU? (If this reads, find out what it was and clean it up with Suppress and Invalidate and give it to the pc.) 8. HAS AN ITEM BEEN PUSHED OFF ON YOU YOU DIDN'T WANT? (If so, find it and get in Suppress and Invalidate on it and tell pc it wasn't his item and continue the original action to find the correct item.) 9. HAD AN ITEM NOT BEEN GIVEN YOU? (If reads, handle as in 7.) 10. HAVE YOU INVALIDATED A CORRECT ITEM FOUND? (if so, rehab the item and find out why the pc invalidated it or if somebody else did it, clean it up and give it to pc again. ) 11 HAVE YOU THOUGHT OF ITEMS THAT YOU DID NOT PUT ON THE LIST? (If so, add them to the correct list. Renull the whole list and give the pc the item.) 12. HAVE YOU BEEN LISTING TO YOURSELF OUT OF SESSION? (If so, find out what question and try to write a list from recall and get an item and give it to the pc.) 13. HAVE YOU BEEN GIVEN SOMEBODY ELSE'S ITEM? (If so, indicate to the pc this was not his item. Don't TRY to find whose it was.) 14. HAS YOUR ITEM BEEN GIVEN TO SOMEONE ELSE? (If so, find if possible what item it was and give it to the pc. Don't try to identify the "somebody else".) 14A. WERE EARLIER LISTING ERRORS RESTIMULATED? (Indicate and correct earlier lists then check the current. ) 14B. HAD THIS LIST ALREADY BEEN HANDLED? (Indicate.) 15. HAS A RELEASE POINT BEEN BY-PASSED ON LISTING? (If so, indicate the overrun to the pc, rehab back.) 16. HAS A RELEASE POINT BEEN BY-PASSED ON THE QUESTION ONLY? (If so, indicate the overrun to the pc and rehab back.) 17. HAVE YOU GONE EXTERIOR WHILE LISTING? (If so, rehab. If Ext Rundown not given, note for C/S.) 18. HAS IT BEEN AN OVERT TO PUT AN ITEM ON A LIST? (If so, find out what item and why.) 19. HAVE YOU WITHHELD AN ITEM FROM A LIST? (If so, get it and add it to the list if that list available. If not put item in the report o) 20. HAS A WITHOLD BEEN MISSED (if so, get it, if discreditable ask "Who nearly found out?") 21. HAS AN ITEM BEEN BY-PASSED? (Locate which one.) HCOB 15.12.68R - 3 - Revised 2.6.72 22. WAS A LISTING QUESTION MEANINGLESS? (If so, find out which one and indicate to the pc.) 23. HAS AN ITEM BEEN ABANDONED? (If so, locate it and get it back for the pc and give it to him. ) 24. HAS AN ITEM BEEN PROTESTED? (If so, locate it and get the protest button in on it.) 25. HAS AN ITEM BEEN ASSERTED? (If so, locate it and get in the assert button on it.) 26. HAS AN ITEM BEEN SUGGESTED TO YOU BY ANOTHER? (If so, get it named and the protest and refusal off.) 27. HAS AN ITEM BEEN VOLUNTEERED BY YOU AND NOT ACCEPTED? (If so, get off the charge and give it to the pc, or if he then changes his mind on it, go on with the listing operation. ) 28. HAS THE ITEM ALREADY BEEN GIVEN? (If so, get it back and give it again.) 29. HAS AN ITEM BEEN FOUND PREVIOUSLY? (If so, find what it was again and give it to pc once more. ) 30. HAS AN ITEM NOT BEEN UNDERSTOOD? (If so, work it over with buttons until pc understands it or accepts or rejects it and go on with listing. ) 30A. WAS THE LISTING Q UESTION NOT UNDERSTOOD? (get defined and check for read. It may be unreading. If so, Indicate that an uncharged Question was listed because it read on a misunderstood.) 30B. WAS A WORD IN THE QUESTION NOT UNDERSTOOD? (Same as 3OR.) 31. WAS AN ITEM DIFFERENT WHEN SAID BY THE AUDITOR? (If so, find out what the item was and give it to the pc correctly.) 31A. DID THE AUDITOR SUGGEST ITEMS TO YOU THAT WERE NOT YOURS? (Indicate as illegal to do so. Correct the list removing these.) 32. WAS NULLING CARRIED ON PAST THE FOUND ITEM? (If so, go back to it and get in Suppress and Protest.) 33. HAS AN ITEM BEEN FORCED ON YOU? (If so, get off the reject and suppress and get the listing action completed to the right item if possible.) 34. HAS AN ITEM BEEN EVALUATED? (If so, get off the disagreement and protest.) 35. HAD EARLIER LISTING BEEN RESTIMULATED? (If so, locate when and indicate the by-passed charge.) HCOB 15.12.68R - 4 - Revised 2.6.72 36. HAS AN EARLIER WRONG ITEM BEEN RESTIMULATED? (If so, find when and indicate the by-passed charge.) 37. HAS AN EARLIER ARC BREAK BEEN RESTIMULATED? (If so, locate and indicate the fact by itsa earlier similar itsa.) 38. DO YOU HAVE AN ARC BREAK BECAUSE OF BEING MADE TO DO THIS? (If so, indicate it to the pc, check the question if reads. Get earlier similar itsa.) 39. HAS THE LIST CORRECTION BEEN OVERRUN? (If so, rehab.) 39A. WAS THE LIST DONE WHILE YOU ALREADY HAD AN ARC BRK, PTP, OR W/H ? 39B. COULDN'T YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT WAS BEING DONE? 39C. COULDN'T YOU UNDERSTAND THE AUDITOR? 39D. DIDN'T THE AUDITOR ACKNOWLEDGE YOU? 40. IS THERE SOME OTHER KIND OF BY-PASSED CHARGE? (If so, find what and indicate it to pc.) 41. WAS THERE NOTHING WRONG IN THE FIRST PLACE? (If so, indicate it to pc.) 42. HAS THE UPSET BEEN HANDLED? (If so, indicate it to the pc.) 43. HAS A LIST PROCESS BEEN OVERRUN? (If so, find which one and rehab.) L. RON HUBBARD FOUNDER LRH:ldm:rw:dz:rr:nt Copyright ($) 1968, 1972 by L Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ===================== 093. HCOB 29 Mar 1970 Auditing and Ethics HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 29 MARCH 1970 Remimeo HCO Sec Hat E/O Hat Tech Sec Qual Sec C/Ss C/S Checksheets AUDITING AND ETHICS Cases undergoing Ethics actions, Comm Evs, amends projects or low conditions should not be audited until the Ethics matter is cleared up and complete. It only louses up their cases to audit them when under such stress. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:dr.ei.rd Copyright ($) 1970 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ===================== 094. HCOB 1 Nov 1974 Rock Slams and Rock Slammers HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex Remimeo HCO BULLETIN OF 1 NOVEMBER 1974 Ex Dn Spclsts Class IVs and above C/Ses Qual HCO Dept 3 Hats PTS/SP Detection Course ROCK SLAMS AND ROCK SLAMMERS A lot of controversy has shown up this year on the subject of R/See and R/Sers. I thought I'd better write an issue on the subject to clarify it. The research on this was actually done years ago. R/Ses An R/S or Rock Slam is defined as a crazy irregular slashing motion of the needle. It can be as narrow as one inch or more than a full dial in width, but it's crazy! It slams back and forth. It is actually quite startling to see one. IT IS VERY DIFFERENT FROM OTHER METER PHENOMENA. Recently Auditors arriving on Flag were found not to know what an R/S was but were calling Dirty Needles, Dirty Reads, Rocket Reads, even Ticks as R/Ses. That comes from never having been trained on what an R/S is and never having seen one. R/SES ARE UNIQUE IN APPEARANCE. Actually this is quite a serious matter because pcs get labeled as R/Sers and get run on Evil Puposes connected with this "R/S" that isn't one. You can really foul up a pc that way, believe me. A real R/S also has a crazy meter. It doesn't read then it does. This happens because the meter reads just below a pc's reality. If the pc has no reality on the subject, then the meter won't read. So you get a faulty meter. It doesn't read on what it should, then it reads, then it doesn't. ROCK SLAMMERS In a group of 400, the actual percentage of R/Sers is low. It's about 8 in 400, or 2 - 2 1/2%. Those figures should seem familiar. They are the same percentage for SPs. And that gives you a clue to the identification of an R/ser. Where requirements for Scn or SO 0rgs have been established for R/Ses they apply to the 2-2 1/2% of real R/Sers as these are also considered security risks for staff purposes. HCOB 1.11.74 - 2 - These people can of course be salvaged as pcs using Expanded Dianetics, Letting them on staff could be disastrous, however. CHECKLIST To assist you in the identification of R/Sets I have done a complete checklist of characteristics and their references. This checklist is to be used whenever a C/S is called upon to inspect a folder to determine whether a person is an R/Ser. 1. The R/Ses reported are actual R/Ses and not some other read or broken meter leads, a dusty or worn TA or Trim "pot", or cans in contact with metal such as rings, bracelets, etc. _________ Ref: E-Meter Essentials; Book of E-Meter Drills; The Book Introducing the E-Meter; HCOB 8 Nov 62 Somatics How to Tell Terminals end Opposition Terminals pg. 2 & 4; HCOB 6 Dec 62, R2-10, R2-12, 3GAXX; HCOB 14 Jan 65 Rings Causing Rock Slams; HCOB False TA Series 24 Oct 71, 12 Nov 71R, 15 Feb 72, 18 Feb 72, 29 Feb 72R, 23 Nov 73. 2. R/Ses have to do with Scientology or one or more areas of the old Scientology List One found in the Book of E-Meter Drills. _________ Ref: Book of E-Meter Drills; HCOB 5 Dec 62 2-12, 3GAXX, 3-21 and Routine 2-10 Modern Assessment; HCOB 23 Nov 62 Urgent Routine Two-Twelve; HCOB 12 Sept 62 Security Checks Again. 3. Pc is Slow or No Case Gain. Also is in a chronically nattery or critical state. _________ Ref: HCOB 23 Nov 62 Routine Two-Twelve; HCOB 5 Dec 62 2-12, 3GAXX, 3-21 and Routine 2-10 Modern Assessment; HCOB 6 Dec 62 R2-10, R2-12, 3GAXX; HCOB 28 Nov 70 C/S Series 22 Psychosis; BPL 31 May 71RA PTS/SP Checksheet and mat'ls. 4. Pc chronically ill or who acts most "PTS." This can be suppressed and hidden from view, however. _________ Ref: HCO PL 15 Nov 70R HCO and Confessionals; HCOB 28 Nov 70 C/S Series 22 Psychosis; PTS/ SP Pack. 5. Pc's product is consistently an overt act and his activities destructive to others. _________ HCOB 1.11.74 - 3 - Ref, HCO PL 14 Nov 70 Org Series 14 The Product as am. Overt Act; PTS/SP Pack; HCO Manual of Justice. 6. Pc's behavior or condition or OCA classifies as psychotic. _________ Ref: HCOB Ex Dn Series and tapes; HCOB 28 Nov 70, Where the answers to this checklist are yes you have an R/Ser. HCO handles and Qual programs them for rehabilitation. PCs WHO R/S Pcs who R/S are given Ex Dn. This does not change even though the pc is not an R/Ser. See HCOB C/S Series 93. Where a pc R/Ses he will have Evil Purposes and be on a succumb as a result. R/Ses indicate an area of psychosis which will ruin the pc's life if allowed to go unhandled. This HCOB in no way changes Ex Dn as a requirement for R/Ses or makes it ok not to handle them. Staff concerned must be able to identify an R/Ser which is different from someone with an R/S. I thought you should have this data and hope it clears up any remaining confusion in the area. L. RON HUBBARD FOUNDER LRH:nt Copyright ($) 1974 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ===================== 095. BTB 7 Nov 1972R Auditor Admin Series 20 - Miscellaneous Reports BOARD TECHNICAL BULLETIN 7 NOVEMBER 1972R ISSUE V Remimeo REVISED & REISSUED 20 NOV 1974 AS BTB CANCELS HCO BULLETIN OF 7 NOVEMBER 1972 ISSUE V SAME TITLE (Revision is underlined) Auditor Admin Series 20R MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS A Miscellaneous Report is a report such as an M.O. Report, a D of P Interview, an Ethics Report, a Success Story, etc., which is put in the PC's folder and gives a C/S more infor- mation about a case. It is the responsibility of HGC Admin to see that Miscellaneous Reports get into the folder, It is the Auditor's responsibility to enter these details in the Folder Summary. D OF P INTERVIEWS D of P Interviews are always done on a meter, and the report from the interview is filed in the folder. DECLARES When a person goes to Declare and through lines, the Exam Report, Attestation and Success Story are stapled to- gether and go into the folder. The fact is noted in the folder Summary. A PC who will not Declare, or who does not have F/N. VGIs on a Declare examination is not sent through to Certs and Awards. The folder is sent through to the Senior C/S or Qual Sec and any outnesses are located and the C/S and Auditor get cramming. The folder is then sent back to the C/S and the HGC to handle. The fact of a mis-declare Is noted in red on the Folder Summary. BTB 7.11.72R V - 2 - Rev. 20.11,74 Corrective actions on persons sent incorrectly to Declare are rapidly handled with no delay to the PC as he is Red-Tagged. CRAMMING ORDERS Tech Cramming Orders are written in duplicate. The original goes direct to the Cramming Officer and the second in the PC folder. By leaving a copy in the folder the corrective actions given an Auditor can be viewed. When the folder arrives at a Senior Org the Flub Catch System can be activated on the C/S as well as the Auditor. References: HCOB 6 Oct 70 C/S Series 19 Folder Error Summaries BPL 4 Sept 72 Cramming Admin & Lines BTB 12 Dec 71R C/S Series 69 Mandatory C/Sing Checklist MEDICAL OFFICER REPORTS A PC goes to the M.O. via the Examiner. The PC Examiner makes a carbon copy of any Medical Exam Report and gives it to the M.O. and gets the original to Tech Services quickly. This must get into the folder so the C/S does not order a major action done on a sick PC. While the PC is on M.O. lines, reports from the M.O. get filed in the folder. The PC when going off M.0. lines goes to the Examiner and the "now well" Exam report goes over to Tech Services who puts it in the PC's folder. References: Tape 4 Ear 71 "Short Conference of the C/S Policy and Tech Lines" Flag Ship Order 259, 3 Mar 71 "Current C/S Policy" ETHICS REPORTS When an Auditor finds an Ethics Situation he should mark it and circle it in red after the session. The PC is not necessarily turned in because a PC cannot be tried on his auditing, it's illegal, but the Auditor should make mention of it on his Auditor's C/S. BTB 7.11.72R V - 3 - Rev. 20.11.74 If it is a serious Ethics Situation that affects others, then it 1s the Auditor's responsibility to report it. The Auditor would make out the report with a carbon copy. He marks it 'SESSION KNOWLEDGE REPORT NON-ACTIONABLE ON (PC's name)' and makes out the report. Both copies are left in the folder. The C/S initials the one for Ethics and sends It on. The other stays in the folder. Sometimes one finds another person's offences than the PC's in getting off withholds. These when serious should be reported to Ethics for Investigation. PCs CAN be sent to Ethics (i.e. for PTS handling, Court of Ethics for refusing to answer an Auditing Question, etc., etc.) But the following rule applies: THERE IS NO DIRECT ROUTING OF PRECLEARS TO THE ETHICS OFFICER EXCEPT THROUGH THE CHANNELS OF THE QUALIFICATION DIVISION. When the C/S decides to send the PC to Ethics, he marks a small goldenrod card "ETH", clips it to the folder end sends the folder to the Examiner. The Examiner checks over the folder, and calls PC In via Qual I&I for an Examination. If folder not okay, it is returned to the C/S with appropriate Cramming Orders. If all is correct the Examiner sends the PC direct to Ethics. If not, PC is routed back to the HGC and the Examiner or Cramming Officer writes up the required Cramming Orders. When PC has finished his Ethics Cycle he is routed back to the Examiner and is returned to the HGC via Qual I&I. It is D of P's responsibility to keep a tension line in with Ethics to make sure the Ethics cycle is completed and the PC is returned to Tech lines. If the PC is returned to HGC lines for a PTS situation to be handled by auditing, a small yellow card is clipped to the outside of the folder by the C/S until the PC finishes the PTS R/D. All data about such actions are filed in the folder, including a copy of the Ethics Officer Interview notes. It Is the responsibility of HGC Admin to see that Conditions Orders and Ethics Orders that affect the preclear's auditing progress get put in the PC's folder for the C/S to see. BTB 7.11.72R V - 4 - Rev. 20.11.74 Cases undergoing Ethics actions, Comm Evs, amends projects or low conditions should not be audited until the Ethics matter is cleared up and complete. It only louses up their cases to audit them when under such stress. PCs in lowered conditions should be encouraged to work out of the condition and when they reach Emergency the auditing may be resumed. Details of these Ethics cycles should be entered by the Auditor in the Folder Summary. References: HCO PL 19 Apr 65 Ethics HCO PL 29 Apr 65 Ethics HCO PL 4 Jul 65 PC Routine Review Code HCO PL 1 May 65 Staff Member Reports HCO PL 17 Jun 65 Staff Auditor Advices HCO PL 30 Jul 65 PC Routing to Ethics BPL 16 Nov 71 Conditions, Awards, and Penances TAPE 7 April 72 Exp DN Tape 3 Auditor Administration HCOB 29 Mar 70 Auditing and Ethics Compiled by Training & Services Bureau Corrected by CS 5 Ens. Judy Ziff Reissued as BTB by Flag Mission 1234 I/C: CPO Andrea Lewis 2nd: Molly Harlow Commodore's Staff Aides Approved by the Board of Issues for the BOARDS OF DIRECTORS of the CHURCHS OF SCIENTOLOGY ($) BDCS:BofI:AL:MH:JZ:BL:MM:mh Copyright ($) 1972, 1974 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED this is Reproduced and issued to you by The Publications Organization U. S. =====================