[Plaintext beta, 26 September 1999] TO THE READER: Scientology is a religious philosophy containing pastoral counseling procedures intended to assist an individual to gain greater knowledge of self. The Mission of the Church of Scientology is a simple one-to help the individual achieve greater self-confidence and personal integrity, thereby enabling him to really trust and respect himself and his fellow man. The attainment of the benefits and goals of Scientology requires each individual's positive participation, as only through his own efforts can he achieve these. This is part of the religious literature and works of the Founder of Scientology, L. Ron Hubbard. It is presented to the reader as part of the record of his personal research into Life, and should be construed only as a written report of such research and not as a statement of claims made by the Church or the author. Scientology and its sub-study, Dianetics, as practiced by the Church, address only the spiritual side of Man. Although the Church, as are all churches, is free to engage in spiritual healing, it does not, as its primary goal is increased knowledge and personal integrity for all. For this reason, the Church does not wish to accept individuals who desire treatment of physical illness or insanity, but refers these to qualified specialists in other organizations who deal in these matters. The Hubbard Electrometer is a religious artifact used in the Church confessional. It, in itself, does nothing, and is used by Ministers only, to assist parishioners in locating areas of spiritual distress or travail. We hope the reading of this book is only the first stage of a personal voyage of discovery into the positive and effective religion of Scientology. THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS Church of Scientology This book belongs to _____ Date _____ The Organization Executive Course AN ENCYCLOPEDIA OF SCIENTOLOGY POLICY by L. Ron Hubbard FOUNDER OF DIANETICS AND SCIENTOLOGY QUALIFICATIONS DIVISION 5 PUBLICATIONS ORGANIZATION Published by the CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLICATIONS ORGANIZATION 2723 West Temple Street Los Angeles California 90026 U.S.A. The Church of Scientology is a Non-Profit Organization. Dianetics(R) and Scientology(R) are Registered Names. Copyright (c) 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1974 1950, 1951, 1952, 1953, 1954, 1955, 1956, 1957, 1958, 1959 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Scientology is an Applied Religious Philosophy No part of this book may be reproduced without permission of the copyright owner. First U.S. Printing 1974 Second US. Printing 1976 Complete Set ISBN 0-88404-033-X Volume 5 ISBN 0-88404-030-5 The E-Meter is not intended or effective for the diagnosis, treatment or prevention of any disease. Dianetics and Scientology are the trademarks of L. Ron Hubbard in respect of his published works. Printed in the United States of America by Kingsport Press, Inc. CONTENTS QUALIFICATIONS DIVISION 5 (CORRECTION DIVISION) Part 1 FORM, PURPOSES, IDEAL SCENES, PRODUCTS AND STATISTICS 31 July 1965 Purposes of the Qualifications Division 1 30 Sept. 1965 Statistics for Divisions (excerpt: Qual Division 5) 2 Circa 1965 Qualifications Division 5 Org Board Outline 3 20 Nov. 1965 The Promotional Actions of an Organization (excerpt: Qual Division 5) 4 15 Dec. 1965 Additions to "The Promotional Actions of an Organization" see - 4 2 Nov. 1967 Qualifications Division, Departments of Examinations, Review and Certifications and Awards 5 2 Nov. 1967 Chaplain's Section (excerpt) 7 14 Mar. 1968 Policies Governing the Qualifications Division (reissued 9 May 1969) 86 17 June 1968 ARC Break Registrars and Auditors (corrects 2 Nov. 1967) 7 29 Oct. 1968 Stat for Class VIII C/S Qual 7 29 Mar. 1970 Qual Stats Revised (amends 30 Sept. 1965) (excerpt) 8 3 June 1970 Orders to Divisions for Immediate Compliance (excerpt: Division V) 9 17 June 1970 OIC Change - Cable Change (cancels 29 Mar. 1970, amends 30 Sept. 1965) (excerpt) 10 15 July 1970 Reorganization of the Correction Division 11 8 Aug. 1970 Reorganization of the Correction Division (amends 15 July 1970) 14 22 Sept. 1970 Ideal Scenes and Statistics for Correction Division Five 18 5 Feb. 1971 Org Gross Divisional Statistics Revised (excerpt: Qual Division 5) (amends 30 Sept. 1965, 17 June 1970 & 22 Sept. 1970) 22 7 Feb. 1971 FEBC Org Board Division 5 23 2 Aug. 1971 Additional Qual Stat 28 14 Aug. 1971 Div V Mini Qual Org Board (revised 5 Sept. 1971 & 19 Nov. 1971) 29 2 Oct. 1971 Divisional Summary for Division V - Correction Division 30 7 Dec. 1971 Correction Division - Purposes, Ideal Scenes, Products, Statistics (cancels 22 Sept. 1970, 15 July 1970 & 8 Aug. 1970) 35 5 Feb. 1972 Div V Mini Qual Org Board (revision of 14 Aug. 1971 & 19 Nov. 1971) 42 16 Feb. 1972 The Purpose of the Department of Personnel Enhancement 210 Part 2 KEEPING SCIENTOLOGY WORKING 7 Feb. 1965 Keeping Scientology Working (reissued 15 June 1970, 28 Jan. 1973 43 14 Feb. 1965 Safeguarding Technology (reissued 7 June 1967) 48 7 June 1967 Safeguarding Technology (reissue of 14 Feb. 1965) 48 31 May 1968 Scientology Technology 49 21 Nov. 1968 Senior Policy 49 20 May 1969 Keeping Dianetics Working in an Area (HCOB) 50 30 May 1970 Cutatives 52 15 June 1970 Keeping Scientology Working (reissue of 7 Feb. 1965) see - 43 17 June 1970 Technical Degrades 54 26 Oct. 1971 Tech Downgrades 56 Part 3 6 Aug. 1965 Qualifications Technical Actions (HCOB) 58 1 Feb. 1966 HGC Cure - Interne Training and Staff Auditors 63 1 Feb. 1966 Staff Auditor and Supervisor Procurement 65 10 Feb. 1966 Tech Recovery 66 7 Mar. 1966 HGC Cure (Continued) 69 7 Mar. 1966 Star Rates on Tech and Qual Staff 70 8 Mar. 1966 High Crime 71 21 July 1966 Tech vs Qual 82 28 Dec. 1967 Qual Senior Datum 73 2 Mar. 1968 Qual See Must Be Clear (modifies 15 Sept. 1967) 74 13 Mar. 1968 Statistics 75 9 Dec. 1968 Qual Has No Backlog (LRH ED 61 INT issued as 75 HCO PL 4 Oct. '70) 15 Nov. 1969 Rights and Duties 76 4 Oct. 1970 Qual Has No Backlog (originally issued as LRH ED 61 INT, 9 Dec. '68) 75 v Part 4 19 Apr. 1965 Training and Processing Regulations Technical Discipline - Students' Questions Vol. 1 - 388, Vol. 4 - 65 28 Apr. 1965 Technical Personnel Vol. 4 - 67 27 May 1965 Processing Vol. 4 - 570 1 July 1965 Ethics Chits Vol. 4 - 69 1 July 1965 Comm Cycle Additives Vol. 1 - 426 7 July 1965 Releases, Policy on Vol. 4 - 71 11 July 1965 Assignment of Tech Personnel (amends & cancels 5 July 1965) Vol. 4 - 70 12 July 1965 Release Policies - Starting the Pc Vol. 4 - 572 19 July 1965 Release Checks, Procedure for Vol. 4 - 574 28 Dec. 1965 E-Meters Allowed Vol. 4 - 77 10 Feb. 1966 Bonuses for Service Delivery Vol. 3 - 204 9 May 1966 Bonuses Adjusted (correction to 10 Feb. 1966) Vol. 3 - 206 17 Oct. 1966 Bonuses Vol. 3 - 209 21 Nov. 1966 Addendum to HCO PL of 17 October 1966, "Bonuses" Vol. 3 - 211 20 Sept. 1967 Confidential Data Vol. 4 - 90 5 Feb. 1969 Press Policy - Code of a Scientologist Vol. 0 - 25 Part 5 THE AUDITOR'S CODE 20 Nov. 1950 Instruction Protocol - Official (reissued 2 Sept. 1970) Vol. 4 - 108 14 Oct. 1968 The Auditor's Code AD 18 Vol. 4 - 111 2 Nov. 1968 Auditor's Code - Add to Pol Ltr 14 October AD 18 see Vol. 4 - 112 5 May 1969 Auditor's Code and Dianetics Vol. 4 - 234 2 Sept. 1970 Instruction Protocol - Official (reissue of 20 Nov. 1950) Vol. 4 - 108 Part 6 FAST FLOW Application of the Fast Flow System of Management to Training, Processing, Examinations, Certification and Awards 29 Mar. 1965 Administration - Flows and Expansion - The Fast Flow System 78 4 May 1965 Release Award - Saint Hill 80 9 July 1965 Qual Goofs (excerpt) 81 21 July 1966 Tech vs Qual 82 6 Aug. 1966 Declare, Multiple 83 9 Jan. 1968 Cancellation of HCO Policy Letter of 12 Sept. 1967 and HCO Policy Letter of 13 Sept. 1967 154 11 Jan. 1968 Speed of Service (ED 805 INT) 84 6 Feb. 1968 Organization - The Flaw 79 7 Feb. 1968 Fast Flow and Ethics 84 24 Feb. 1968 Fast Flow for SHSBC Students' Preclears (amends 30 Dec. 1966) 85 11 Mar. 1968 False Attestation 85 14 Mar. 1968 Policies Governing the Qualifications Division Fast Flow (reissued 8 May 1968) 86 8 May 1968 Policies Governing the Qualifications Division Fast Flow (reissue of 14 Mar. 1968) 86 15 May 1968 Additions to HCO PL 14 March 1968, reissued 8 May 1968, "Policies Governing the Qualifications Division" 91 1 Aug. 1968 Cancel Attestation on UK and US SHSBC (LRH ED 29 WW) 92 7 Sept. 1968 Review Complete - Pc Attestations 92 13 Dec. 1968 Cancellation 93 17 Jan. 1969 Pc Attestations 93 20 Jan. 1969 A Vital Target - Trained Auditor Programme (LRH ED 81 INT) Vol. 4 - 93 28 Jan. 1969 Addition to HCO Policy Letter of 14 March 1968 Policies Governing the Qualifications Division - Fast Flow 94 8 May 1969 Fast Flow by Attestation Vol. 4 - 237 22 July 1969 Fast Flow Training (cancels 28 Jan. 1969) 94 3 Sept. 1969 Attestation Reinstated (LRH ED 82 INT issued as a Policy Letter) 95 6 Apr. 1970 Scientology Release Attestation Form 96 10 May 1970 Single Declare (cancels 6 Aug. 1966) 98 21 May 1970 Fast Flow Grades Cancelled (LRH ED 103 INT) 99 23 May 1970 Cancellation of Policies Governing the Qualifications Division - Fast Flow 101 25 June 1970 Expanded Lower Grades - Chart of Abilities Gained & Inabilities Lost (revised & reissued 17 July 1970) (cancels 6 Apr. 1970) 159 Note: A study of this Division should include POLICIES ON "SOURCES OF TROUBLE", Volume 1, pages 510 - 529. vi DEPARTMENT 13 DEPARTMENT OF VALIDITY (A study of this Department should include the section in Volume 4 entitled CLASS AND GRADE PROGRAMME, pages 360 - 403, and the section in this Volume entitled FAST FLOW, pages 78 - 101.) QUAL I & I (See also INVOICING, Volume 3, pages 255 - 270, and ROUTING - RECEPTION, Volume 1, pages 61 - 75.) 28 Apr. 1965 Routing (excerpt) 141 10 July 1965 Lines and Terminals - Routing Vol. 0 -113 20 Oct. 1967 The Lines of the Qualifications Division The Interview Invoice Section 102 14 Dec. 1971 The Lines of the Correction Division - Qual Interview and Invoice Lines and Routings (amends 20 Nov. 1967)106 14 Dec. 1971 Qual Student Lines 107 14 Dec. 1971 Qual Preclear Lines 109 14 Dec. 1971 Qual Staff Service Lines 111 14 Dec. 1971 Qual Technical Lines 112 14 Dec. 1971 Qual Interview and Invoice Officer Lines - Administration 113 Tech and Qual LINES AND ROUTING 24 Apr. 1965 Review 341 28 Apr. 1965 Power Processes 343 4 July 1965 Pc Routing - Review Code 346 12 July 1965 Release Policies - Starting the Pc Vol. 2 - 326, Vol. 4 - 572 19 July 1965 Release Checks, Procedure for Vol. 4 - 574 30 July 1965 Preclear Routing to Ethics Vol. 1 - 427, Vol. 4 - 606 5 Aug. 1965 Release Check Outs 143 6 Aug. 1965 Qualifications Technical Actions (HCOB) 58 9 Aug. 1965 Release Check Outs (addendum to 5 Aug. 1965) 145 24 Aug. 1965 Pcs Released Routing Vol. 4 - 606 24 Sept. 1965 Free Release Check Vol. 2 - 275 14 Oct. 1965 Potential Trouble Source Routing 348 30 Dec. 1965 PTS Auditing and Routing Vol. 1 - 439, Vol. 4 - 578 21 July 1966 Tech vs Qual 82 22 Sept. 1967 Routing Form Attestations Vol. 1 - 62 5 Mar. 1971 The Fantastic New HGC Line (HCOB) Vol. 4 - 581 6 Mar. 1971 Line Design - HGC Lines, An Example Vol. 4 - 585 EXAMINER 27 Nov. 1959 Purpose - HCO Board of Review (excerpt) 114 31 July 1965 Department of Examinations - Purpose (excerpt) 114 26 Oct. 1971 Tech Downgrades 56 STUDENT EXAMINER (Includes HCO Board of Review data. Course curriculum information is fully covered in Volume 4 under Department of Training.) 12 Dec. 1950 Certification Board - Duties and Responsibilities 115 1 Oct. 1958 HCO Board of Review (excerpt) 116 25 Nov. 1958 HCO Board of Review - Function and Practice 117 28 Feb. 1959 HCO Board of Review Duties 119 24 Apr. 1959 Final HPA Exam - HCO Board of Review 121 18 May 1960 Certifications 174 11 Oct. 1960 Case Assessments for Students 123 23 Nov. 1960 Reality Test for Students see - 128 22 Feb. 1961 Permanent Staff Exam 124 7 Apr. 1961 Examinations of Academy Students to be done by D of P 126 19 Sept. 1961 Reality Test for Students (cancels 23 Nov. 1960) 128 20 Sept. 1961 Training Policy 128 2 Nov. 1961 Allowed Processes from Courses 129 2 Nov. 1961 Training Quality (reissued 3 Mar. 1967) 129 3 Jan. 1962 Upgrading of Auditors Vol. 4 - 308 7 Jan. 1962 HCO Board of Review - Class II Awards 130 22 Jan. 1962 Crash Programme Vol. 4 - 26 21 May 1962 Tape Examinations Vol. 4 - 158 31 July 1962 Oral Examination for HPA/HCA 131 vii 2 Oct. 1962 Termination & Classification Vol. 4 - 415 12 Oct. 1962 HPA/HCA Written Examination Vol. 4 - 334 13 Feb. 1963 Academy Taught Processes Vol. 4 - 339 14 Feb. 1963 How to Examine - Theory Examinations Vol. 4 - 163 5 Sept. 1964 Examinations 131 16 Sept. 1964 Terminations Vol. 4 - 447 31 Dec. 1964 Certificates 187 16 Mar. 1965 Further Material on Study - Examinations see - 133 2 Apr. 1965 Star - Rate Checkouts for Process (modifies 27 Feb. 1965) Vol 4 - 453 9 Apr. 1965 Correction to Policy Letters on Certification and Awards 191 12 Apr. 1965 Classification Pass Marks 131 16 Apr. 1965 Drills, Allowed Vol. 4 - 188 13 May 1965 SHSBC Unit - Graduation Vol. 4 - 457 16 May 1965 Academy Courses - General Remarks - Zero Courses - HRS Vol. 4 - 347 17 May 1965 Academy Processing Vol. 4 - 224 23 Aug. 1965 Classification at Upper Levels - Temporary Measure Vol. 4 - 392 14 Oct. 1965 Course Pattern (amends 27 Feb. 1965) Vol. 4 - 464 19 Oct. 1965 Release Declarations Vol. 4 - 597 10 Feb. 1966 Check Sheets, Course Vol. 4 - 466 29 June 1966 Keep Academy Check Sheets Up - to - Date 132 12 Oct. 1966 Examinations Vol. 4 - 198 1 Feb. 1967 Student Auditing of Preclears (replaces 29 Oct. 1965) 132 3 Mar. 1967 Training Quality (reissue of 2 Nov. 1961) 129 13 Sept. 1967 Further Material on Study - Examinations (reissue of 16 Mar. 1965) 133 22 Sept. 1967 Solo Auditing Folders 135 19 Oct. 1968 Course Completion - Student Indicators Vol. 4 - 202 2 Dec. 1968 Examinations 135 13 Jan. 1969 Standard Examinations 136 5 May 1969 Dianetic Course Examinations 137 24 June 1969 Dianetics - Pre - Auditing Examination 138 21 May 1970 Fast Flow Grades Cancelled (LRH ED 103 INT) 99 8 June 1970 Student Auditing Vol. 4 - 227 21 Nov. 1971 Scientology Courses Examination Policy (addition to 8 Mar. 1966) 139 PC EXAMINER (See also FAST FLOW, pages 78 - 101.) 2 Apr. 1965 Meter Checks 140 28 Apr. 1965 Routing (excerpt) 141 4 July 1965 Pc Routing - Review Code 346 9 July 1865 Qual Goofs 142 12 July 1865 Release Policies - Starting the Pc Vol. 4 - 572 19 July 1965 Release Checks, Procedure for Vol. 4 - 574 26 July 1965 Release Declaration Restrictions - Healing Amendments 193 5 Aug. 1965 Release Check Outs 143 6 Aug. 1965 Qualifications Technical Actions (HCOB) 58 7 Aug. 1965 Floating Needle on Former Releases 145 9 Aug. 1965 Release Check Outs (addendum to 5 Aug. 1965) 145 12 Oct. 1965 Release Declarations 146 22 Oct. 1965 Requirements for Student Classification 146 7 Nov. 1966 Clear Check-outs in Continental Orgs 147 6 Sept. 1967 Clear Check Outs see - 148 13 Sept. 1967 Clear Check Outs (amends 6 Sept. 1967) 148 15 Sept. 1967 Release and Clear Check Outs 149 15 Sept. 1967 Examiner Bonuses 151 25 Sept. 1967 Grades Above Clear 153 8 Oct. 1967 Clear Checks and Re-Clear Checks (HCOB) 153 8 Nov. 1967 Clear Checks and Re-Clear Checks Cancellation of HCO Policy Letter of 12 Sept. 1967 and HCO Policy Letter of 13 Sept. 1967 154 2 Mar. 1968 Qual Sec Must Be Clear (modifies 15 Sept. 1967) 74 18 Sept. 1968 Examiner's Form see - 163 30 Sept. 1968 Examiner's Form (Revised) see - 163 13 Oct. 1968 Examiner 155 11 Dec. 1968 Examiner (addendum to 13 Oct. 1968) 155 9 May 1969 Examiner's Form (30 Sept. 1968 revised) see - 163 13 May 1969 Cramming Section - Service to Trained Auditors 307 26 Jan. 1970 Examiner and Floating Needle (revises 13 Oct. '68 & 11 Dec. '68) 156 26 Jan. 1970 Examiner's Form (replaces & revises 9 May 1969) see - 163 28 Mar. 1970 R6EW and Clear (cancels & replaces 28 Jan. 1970) 157 6 Apr. 1970 Scientology Release Attestation Form 96 11 Apr. 1970 Review Complete? 158 10 May. 1970 Single Declare (cancels 6 Aug. 1966) 98 viii 21 May 1970 Fast Flow Grades Cancelled (LRH ED 103 INT) 99 30 May 1970 Cutatives 52 25 June 1970 Expanded Lower Grades - Chart of Abilities Gained and Inabilities Lost (cancels 6 Apr. 1970) see - 159 17 July 1970 Expanded Lower Grades - Chart of Abilities Gained & Inabilities Lost (revision & reissue of 25 June 1970) (cancels 6 Apr. 1970) 159 8 Sept. 1970 Examiner's 24 Hour Rule 161 13 Jan. 1971 Exam 24 Hour Rule (additional information) 162 8 Mar. 1971 Examiner's Form (replaces & revises 9 May 1969 & 26 Jan. 1970) 163 CERTS AND AWARDS (A Study of this section should include the CLASS AND GRADE PROGRAMME, Volume 4, pages 360 - 403.) 27 Nov. 1959 HCO Board of Review (excerpt) 164 31 July 1965 The Department of Certifications and Awards - Purpose (excerpt) 164 12 Dec. 1950 Certification Board - Duties and Responsibilities 115 7 Nov. 1955 Hubbard Communications Office (Operational Bulletin)165 20 Mar. 1957 Staff Certificate Display 165 28 Apr. 1957 HCO Board of Review - Goal 165 19 Aug. 1957 Release All Certificates... 166 2 Sept. 1957 Field Certificates 166 19 Nov. 1957 HCO - Final Authority on Certificates (HCOB) 166 28 Mar. 1958 Only Organization Offices can Certify Clears (HCOB) 167 30 June 1958 Procedure for Certifying Clears (HCOB) (revision of HCOB 28 May 1958) 168 30 June 1958 Clear Bracelet Procedure (revision of 25 Feb. 1958) 169 17 Nov. 1958 Clear Bracelets (HCOB) 170 25 Nov. 1958 HCO Board of Review - Function and Practice 117 28 Feb. 1959 HCO Board of Review Duties 119 20 Mar. 1959 Certificates Handling 170 29 July 1959 Sending Certificates by Mail 171 31 Aug. 1959 Certifications 171 27 Nov. 1959 HCO Board of Review (excerpt) 164 31 Dec. 1959 Routing of Certificates for Sterling Areas 172 22 Feb. 1960 HPA Qualifications 172 25 Apr. 1960 Important Certification Change 173 29 Apr. 1960 Certification Change 173 18 May 1960 Certifications 174 23 May 1960 Cancellation of Certificates Vol. 1 - 366 7 July 1960 Training Applicants Vol. 2 - 318, Vol. 4 - 132 11 Oct. 1960 Case Assessments for Students 123 12 Feb. 1961 Certificates and Awards - Revised List 175 16 May 1961 HPA/HCA Requirement 176 14 Nov. 1961 Stabilization of Clears 176 21 Nov. 1961 Training Course Requirements Vol. 4 - 306 30 July 1962 Certification and Validation Requirements Vol. 4 - 326 13 Sept. 1962 Certificate Application Form 177 28 Sept. 1962 Saint Hill Briefing Course Terminations Vol. 4 - 414 19 Oct. 1962 Preparation of HPA/HCA Certificates 179 4 Dec. 1962 R2 - 12 Validation 179 9 July 1963 HPA/HCA Certificate Check Sheet Vol. 4 - 342 12 Aug. 1963 Certificates and Awards 180 8 Oct. 1963 New Saint Hill Certificates and Course Changes Vol. 4 - 434 26 Nov. 1963 Certificate and Classification Changes - Everyone Classified Vol. 4 - 360 11 Dec. 1963 Classification for Everyone (amends 26 Nov. 1963) Vol. 4 - 364 5 Feb. 1964 Founding Scientologist Certificate Vol. 2 - 264 21 Feb. 1964 Issuing of Certificates 183 16 June 1964 Personnel Records - Admin Certs (modifies 12 Aug. 1963) 184 1 July 1964 Certification and Classification 186 18 Sept. 1964 Final Classification on Termination from Saint Hill Vol. 4 - 447 23 Sept. 1964 Policies: Dissemination and Programmes Vol. 2 - 41, Vol. 4 - 40 13 Nov. 1964 Provisional Class VI Classification (cancels 18 Sept. 1964) Vol. 4 - 448 31 Dec. 1964 Certificates 187 5 Mar. 1965 Certificates and Awards - New Status of Honorary Awards 188 7 Apr. 1965 Book Auditor 190 9 Apr. 1965 Correction to Policy Letters on Certification and Awards 191 21 Apr. 1965 Basic Certificates - Uncertified Personnel 192 28 Apr. 1965 Power Processes 343 17 June 1965 Scientology Pins (amends & cancels 12 Apr. 1965) Vol. 2 - 381 26 July 1965 Release Declaration Restrictions - Healing Amendments 193 17 Aug. 1965 Certification of Franchise Students 193 ix 23 Aug. 1965 Crediting of Auditor in Release Log Book 194 27 Oct. 1965 Grade Award Insignia 194 13 Nov. 1965 Release Pins 195 13 Dec. 1965 Numbering of Certificates 196 17 Jan. 1966 Unclassed Certificates - HAS, HBA, HQS 197 14 Feb. 1966 Doctor Title Abolished Vol. 2 - 119 1 Aug. 1966 Sign Ups and Discounts 198 16 Aug. 1966 Release Grades 199 13 Sept. 1967 Clear Check Outs (amends 6 Sept. 1967) 148 7 Sept. 1968 Review Complete - Pc Attestations 92 20 Jan. 1969 Classification see - 200 13 Feb. 1969 Ethics Protection Conditions Blue Star, Green Star, Gold Star Vol. 0 - 248, Vol. 1 - 492 11 July 1969 Dianetics Auditing Completion Certificate 199 7 Sept. 1969 Classification (20 Jan. 1969 amended & reissued) 200 18 Nov. 1969 Dianetics - Right to Audit 201 18 Nov. 1969 Dianetics - Right to Teach 202 6 Apr. 1970 Scientology Release Attestation Form 96 25 Apr. 1970 Guarantee of Service Delivery 203 8 June 1970 Student Auditing Vol. 4 - 227 17 July 1970 Expanded Lower Grades - Chart of Abilities Gained & Inabilities Lost (revision & reissue of 25 June 1970) (cancels 6 Apr. 1970) 159 13 Jan. 1971 Attestation at Certs & Awards 204 6 Nov. 1971 Interneships Line - Up - Auditor Interneships 326 MEMBERSHIPS (See also MEMBERSHIPS, Volume 3, pages 143, 150, 151, 157, 165, 245 - 254 and 258.) 6 Apr. 1957 Membership Handling (excerpt) (HCOB) 205 3 May 1960 Keeping Memberships in Force 206 28 July 1960 International Membership Privileges Vol. 2 - 195 5 June 1962 Permanent Staff Privilege 206 5 July 1963 Sales of Lifetime Memberships or Shares 207 21 Apr. 1965 Membership - Attestations 207 1 Sept. 1965 Current Policy - Franchise Vol. 3 - 253 1 Sept. 1965 Membership Policies 208 10 Dec. 1965 Membership Billing (Sec ED 147 INT) 209 15 Dec. 1965 Additions to "The Promotional Actions of an see - 205 Organization" 1 Aug. 1966 Sign Ups and Discounts 198 1 Aug. 1966 Refund Addition - Membership Refunds Vol. 3 - 347 14 Dec. 1971 Qual Student Lines - Membership Handling 108 DEPARTMENT 14 DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL ENHANCEMENT (A study of this Department should include HATS, Volume 0, pages 63 - 77, and Volume 1, pages 153 - 159; DEV-T, Volume 0, pages 119 - 152; PROGRAMMING, PLANNING AND TARGETS, Volume 0, pages 303 - 335; and the PERSONNEL, DATA and ORG SERIES in the 1970 and 1971 Year Books.) 7 Dec. 1971 Purpose, Ideal Scene, Product, Statistic Department of Personnel Enhancement 36 16 Feb. 1972 The Purpose of the Department of Personnel Enhancement 210 AUDITING OF STAFF 11 Apr. 1957 Intensives for Staff see - 212 16 May 1957 Intensives for Staff 212 11 June 1957 Staff Intensives; (Assoc Sec Directive) 212 9 July 1958 Staff Clearing (HCOB) 213 27 Oct. 1958 Staff Member Processing 213 2 July 1959 Staff Auditing Requirement Vol. 0 - 120 22 July 1959 Processing of Staff Members 213 7 June 1960 Staff Auditing 213 3 Aug. 1960 Security of Persons Leaving Staffs 353 7 Nov. 1960 HCO Area Secretary Hat Addition Vol. 1 - 31 21 Dec. 1960 Staff Clearing - New Policy 214 22 Mar. 1961 Staff Members Ordered to Processing 215 9 Apr. 1961 Staff Intensives (modified) 216 3 Oct. 1961 Auditing Schedules 217 6 Oct. 1961 Staff Clearing 218 27 Dec. 1961 Sec Checks on Staff 356 x 27 Dec. 1961 Processing D of P 356 22 Jan. 1962 Crash Programme Vol. 4 - 26 17 May 1962 Staff Staff Auditor's Hat 219 10 Sept. 1962 Staff Clearing Program 221 12 Sept. 1962 Goal Processing - Importance of 224 30 Apr. 1963 The Saint Hill Staff Co-Audit 225 17 June 1963 Staff Clearing Program (amends 10 Sept. 1962) 226 22 Aug. 1963 ARC Break Assessments on Staff 228 4 Dec. 1963 Org Staff W/H Checks 228 13 Dec. 1963 Co-Audit 229 21 Feb. 1964 Staff Regulations - Auditing Versus Job Vol. 0 - 43 19 Mar. 1964 Staff Regulations - Staff Intensives 230 10 Aug. 1964 Good Workers Vol. 0 - 44 8 Apr. 1965 HCO, Org Executive and Divisional Secretaries, Justice on, and Auditing of Vol. 1 - 565 23 Apr. 1965 Clarification - Auditing of Org Executives Vol. 1 - 566 29 Apr. 1965 Bonuses 231 13 Jan. 1966 Regulations for Auditing of Staff and Students 233 20 July 1970 Cases and Morale of Staff 234 STAFF TRAINING OFFICER (See also sections on HATS, Volume 0, pages 63 - 77, and Volume 1, pages 153 - 159.) 21 Sept. 1969 Staff Training Officer 237 2 May 1957 Qualifications of a Permanent Staff Member see - 239 3 June 1957 Qualifications of a Permanent Staff Member (Assoc Sec Directive) 239 5 Sept. 1957 Validation of Staff 240 10 Mar. 1959 Permanent Staff Members 240 18 Jan. 1960 Qualifications of Permanent Staff Members 241 2 June 1960 Requirements for Staff Posts 241 26 Nov. 1960 Permanent Staff Member Requirements 242 13 Feb. 1961 Permanent Staff Requirement Changes (modifies 26 Nov. 1960) 243 17 Feb. 1961 Staff Post Qualifications Permanent Executives to be Approved see - 244 22 Feb. 1961 Permanent Staff Exam 124 26 Feb. 1961 Qualification of Executives 243 28 Mar. 1961 Personnel Policies - Staff Post Qualifications Permanent Executives to be Approved (modifies 17 Feb. 1961) 244 22 July 1961 Executives' Pay 247 23 Oct. 1961 Pay of Executives (modifies 22 July 1961) 247 23 Jan. 1962 Permanent Executives (amends 17 Feb. 1961) 247 21 May 1962 Permanent Staff 248 5 June 1962 Permanent Staff Privilege 248 12 Aug. 1963 Certificates and Awards 180 16 June 1964 Personnel Records - Admin Certs (modifies 12 Aug. 1963) 184 16 Apr. 1965 Drills, Allowed Vol. 4 - 188 21 Apr. 1965 Basic Certificates - Uncertified Personnel 192 4 Jan. 1966 Personnel Staff Status 249 29 Apr. 1966 Policy Check Outs and E-Meter 252 20 July 1966 Staff Status see - 253 22 Aug. 1966 Addendum to HCO Pol Ltr of 20 July 1966 "Staff Status" 254 21 Mar. 1967 Org Exec Course Vol. 0 - 3 19 May. 1969 Staff Status (20 July 1966 amended) 253 5 Jan. 1969 Staff Status Two (modifies 4 Jan. 1966) 255 21 Sept. 1969 Staff Training Officer 237 2 Aug. 1971 Study Time 256 13 Jan. 1972 Inter - Dependent Hatting and Programming Functions 276 PERSONNEL PROGRAMMING 22 Jan. 1972 Personnel Programming 258 23 Oct. 1971 Personnel Programming Rules (HCOB) 259 23 Oct. 1971 Personnel Programming Technology (HCOB) 262 23 Oct. 1971 Personnel Programming White Form (HCOB) 264 23 Oct. 1971 Master Personnel Programming Tally Sheet (HCOB) 268 23 Oct. 1971 Personnel Programmer Ethics Intervention Rights (HCOB) 272 23 Oct. 1971 Individual Staff Study Orders (HCOB) 273 13 Jan. 1972 Tips on Personnel Programming (HCOB) 274 13 Jan. 1972 Inter - Dependent Hatting and Programming Functions 276 14 Jan. 1972 Management Cycle (24 June 1970 revised) 277 14 Jan. 1972 The "OK To Be A - - " System 278 xi CHAPLAIN The Church of Scientology Creed 280 20 Mar. 1957 Ministerial Ordination 281 3 May 1957 Ministerial Qualifications see - 281 15 Aug. 1957 Ministerial Qualifications (supersedes 3 May 1957) see - 281 12 June 1958 Ministerial Qualifications (second revision) 281 29 Oct. 1962 Religion 282 12 Aug. 1963 Certificates and Awards - Ministerial Awards and Insignia 182 2 Aug. 1965 Chaplain 283 19 Jan. 1966 Chaplain, Transfer of 283 5 Aug 1966 Chaplain's Court - Civil Hearings 284 15 Nov. 1966 Routing of Chaplain's Court Orders 286 22 Sept. 1967 Ministerial Qualifications (reissue of 12 June 1958) see - 281 2 Nov. 1967 Chaplain's Section (excerpt) 287 2 Sept. 1968 Chaplain 287 12 Feb. 1969 Religion 288 6 Mar. 1969 Scientology is a Religion 289 4 Apr. 1969 Scientology Marriage Ceremonies 291 24 Apr. 1969 A Scientology Church Register 291 26 Jan. 1970 Scientology Prayer 292 16 Apr. 1970 Morale 293 20 July 1970 Cases and Morale of Staff 234 27 Oct. 1970 A Book: "The Background to the Religion of Scientology and Ceremonies of the Church of Scientology of California WW" 294 12 Apr. 1971 Ordination Ceremony 295 4 June 1971 Prayer Day Ordination Ceremony 296 MEDICAL OFFICER 3 Oct. 1970 Medicine and Dianetics 298 3 Oct. 1970 The Role of the Medical Officer 300 11 Oct. 1970 Medical Officer's Code 303 DEPARTMENT 15 DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION ORG LIBRARY - STAFF LIBRARIAN 2 Oct. 1971 Divisional Summary for Division V - Correction Division (FDD 18 Qual Int) - Staff Librarian 32 7 Dec. 1971 Purpose, Ideal Scene, Product, Statistic - Staff Librarian 38 CRAMMING (A study of this section should include COURSE SUPERVISION, Volume 4, pages 141 - 218.) 10 Nov. 1965 The Cramming Section 305 6 Oct. 1966 Cramming - Students Who Flunk Classification for a Level 306 13 May 1969 Cramming Section - Service to Trained Auditors 307 INTERNESHIPS 28 Aug. 1959 BScn Interneships 308 16 May 1961 HPA/HCA Requirement 176 29 May 1962 Interne Hat - What is Expected of Internes 309 29 June 1962 Staff and Interne Auditors 311 1 Feb. 1966 HGC Cure - Interne Training and Staff Auditors 63 1 Feb. 1966 Staff Auditor and Supervisor Procurement 65 7 Mar. 1966 HGC Cure (Continued) 69 8 Mar. 1966 High Crime 71 11 Sept. 1967 Interne Training Programme 312 27 Aug. 1968 Sea Org Internes 315 13 Nov. 1969 Interneships and Case Supervisors 316 18 Apr. 1970 Correction to HCO P/L 13 November 1969 see - 316 20 July 1970 Internships and Case Supervisors (amends 13 Nov. '69 & 18 Apr. '70) 317 22 July 1970 Hubbard Scientist of Standard Tech 319 17 Feb. 1971 Class VII 320 19 July 1971 Internes (HCOB) 322 24 Aug. 1971 Interne Checksheets - Okays to Audit 324 6 Nov. 1971 Selling Internships (amends 20 July 1970) 325 6 Nov. 1971 Interneships Line - Up - Auditor Interneships 326 6 Nov. 1971 Case Supervisor Interneships 328 6 Nov. 1971 HGC Auditors and HGC Auditors in Training 329 8 Nov. 1971 Interneships - Electronic Attestation Form see - 330 18 Feb. 1972 Interneships - Electronic Attestation Form (revises 8 Nov. 1971) 330 22 Feb. 1972 Interneship Errors Found 332 xii TRAINING OF TECH STAFF 13 Mar. 1961 Staff Auditor Training Vol. 1 - 114 2 Apr. 1961 Staff Auditor Training - Sequence of Study 334 5 Jan. 1962 Examination for HGC Auditors 336 21 Sept. 1965 Auditor Estimation Test 337 1 Feb. 1966 HGC Cure - Interne Training and Staff Auditors 63 7 Mar. 1966 Star Rates on Tech and Qual Staff 70 8 Mar. 1966 High Crime 71 12 Jan. 1969 Auditors and Training 340 2 Aug. 1971 Study Time 256 REVIEW 24 Apr. 1965 Review 341 28 Apr. 1965 Power Processes 343 29 Apr. 1965 Ethics - Review (correction to 24 Apr. 1965) (excerpt) 345 4 July 1965 Pc Routing - Review Code 346 9 July 1965 Qual Goofs - Review Holds (excerpt) 347 12 July 1965 Release Policies - Starting the Pc Vol. 2 - 326, Vol. 4 - 572 19 July 1965 Release Checks, Procedure for Vol. 4 - 574 30 July 1965 Preclear Routing to Ethics Vol. 1 - 427, Vol. 4 - 606 6 Aug. 1965 Qualifications Technical Actions (HCOB) 58 9 Aug. 1965 Release Check Outs (addendum to 5 Aug. 1965) 145 14 Oct. 1965 Potential Trouble Source Routing 348 30 Dec. 1965 PTS Auditing and Routing Vol. 1 - 439, Vol. 4 - 578 1 Feb. 1966 HGC Cure - Interne Training and Staff Auditors 63 21 July 1966 Tech vs Qual 82 28 Dec. 1967 Qual Senior Datum 73 7 Sept 1968 Review Complete - Pc Attestations 92 9 Dec. 1968 Qual Has No Backlog (LRH ED 61 INT issued as HCO PL 4 Oct. 1970) 75 17 Jan. 1969 Pc Attestations 93 11 Apr. 1970 Review Complete? 158 21 May 1970 Fast Flow Grades Cancelled (LRH ED 103 INT) 99 14 Dec. 1971 Qual Preclear Lines 109 ARC BREAK PROGRAMME 16 Sept. 1957 HGC Policy Vol. 4 - 498 6 June 1962 ARC Break Clean - up Programme 349 1 Sept. 1967 ARC Break Cleanup Programme (excerpt from ED 473 WW 842 SH) 350 15 Sept. 1967 Release and Clear Check Outs 149 17 June 1968 ARC Break Registrars and Auditors (corrects 2 Nov. 1967) 350 20 Jan. 1969 ARC Break Program 351 23 Feb. 1970 Ethics - Quality of Service Vol. 1 - 506, Vol. 4 - 100 9 Aug. 1971 ARC Break Program (cancels 20 Jan. 1969) 352 14 Dec. 1971 Qual Preclear Lines 109 Appendix 3 Aug. 1960 Security of Persons Leaving Staffs 353 13 Dec. 1960 Security Checks 353 28 Jan. 1961 New Security Rules 354 25 Mar. 1961 Security Rules (cancels 28 Jan. 1961) 355 27 Dec. 1961 Sec Checks on Staff 356 27 Dec. 1961 Processing D of P 356 17 Jan. 1962 Responsibility Again (reissued 7 June 1967) 357 22 Jan. 1962 Security Checks 358 27 Feb. 1962 Clean Hands Clearance Check 358 30 Oct. 1962 Security Risks Infiltration 359 19 Mar. 1968 Staff Status (20 July 1966 amended) 254 26 Aug. 1968 Security Checks Abolished 360 30 July 1970 The Tech and Ethics of Confessionals 361 15 Nov. 1970 Confessionals 364 Note: The materials in this volume are listed mainly in order of appearance. Additionally, some policies are listed in more than one section (with page numbers in italics), as they deal with more than one area of operation. Relevant policies from other OEC volumes are also listed, with volume and page numbers in italics. A complete date order index appears in the back of the book, starting on page 366. The GREEN FORM and other technical forms not included in the OEC Volumes are found in the technical materials of the levels where they specifically apply. xiii YOUR POST A post in a Scientology Organization isn't a job. It's a trust and a crusade. We're freemen and women-probably the last free men and women on Earth. Remember, we'll have to come back to Earth some day no matter what "happens" to us. If we don't do a good job now we may never get another chance. Yes, I'm sure that's the way it is. So we have an organization, we have a field we must support, we have a chance. That's more than we had last time night's curtain began to fall on freedom. So we're using that chance. An organization such as ours is our best chance to get the most done. So we're doing it! L. RON HUBBARD xiv HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 31 JULY 1965 Remimeo All Qual Hats Qual Division (Star-Rated on all check-outs) PURPOSES OF THE QUALIFICATIONS DIVISION The Qualifications Division is Division Number 5 of the Organization. This Division is headed by the Qualifications Secretary. It consists of three departments. The Department of Examinations, Department Number 13, is headed by the Director of Examinations. The Department of Review, Department Number 14, is headed by the Director of Review. The Department of Certifications and Awards, Department Number 15, is headed by the Director of Certifications. The Departments have various sections and units. THE QUALIFICATIONS DIVISION The prime purpose of the Qualifications Division is: "TO ENSURE THE RESULTS OF SCIENTOLOGY, CORRECT THEM WHEN NEEDFUL AND ATTEST TO THEM WHEN ATTAINED." The activities of the Division are covered by the prime purpose of the Division and all rules, regulations, policies and routes relating to that Division are for the purpose of assisting it to carry out its purpose and no order, rule, regulation, policy or route may swerve it or its Departments, Sections or Units or its executives or personnel from carrying out the purposes outlined herein. DEPARTMENT OF EXAMINATIONS The prime purpose of the Department of Examinations and all its sections and units is: "TO HELP RON ENSURE THAT THE TECHNICAL RESULTS OF THE ORGANIZATION ARE EXCELLENT AND CONSISTENT, THAT STUDENTS AND PRECLEARS ARE WITHOUT FLAW FOR THEIR SKILL OR STATE WHEN PASSED AND THAT ANY TECHNICAL DEFICIENCY OF ORG PERSONNEL IS REPORTED AND HANDLED SO THAT THE TECHNICAL RESULTS OF THE ORGANIZATION CONTINUE TO BE EXCELLENT AND CONSISTENT." IT MUST BE KEPT IN MIND THAT THE PRODUCT OF THE ORGANIZATION IS NOT SCIENTOLOGISTS, BUT CONDITIONS CHANGED BY SCIENTOLOGY. THEREFORE THE ABILITY OF THE AUDITOR TO CHANGE CONDITIONS IN, PRECLEARS AND THE ABILITY OF THE PRECLEAR OR CLEAR TO CHANGE CONDITIONS ALONG THE DYNAMICS ARE THE ONLY CONCERN OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EXAMINATIONS. The orders, rules, regulations, policies and routes relating to this department were intended to assist it and expedite the carrying out of its purpose. Therefore no order, rule, regulation, policy or route may be interpreted to swerve the Department of Examinations from its prime purpose, which is paramount in all its activities. Its policies and routes exist to carry out its prime purpose and for no other reason. The integrity of Scientology and its hope for beings in this Universe are entrusted to the Department of Examinations. THE DEPARTMENT OF REVIEW The prime purpose of the Department of Review and all its sections and units is: "TO HELP RON CORRECT ANY NON-OPTIMUM RESULT OF THE ORGANIZATION AND ALSO TO ADVISE WAYS AND MEANS BASED ON ACTUAL EXPERIENCE IN THE DEPARTMENT TO SAFEGUARD AGAINST ANY CONTINUED POOR RESULT FROM ANY TECHNICAL PERSONNEL OR THE FUNCTION OF THE ORGANIZATION." The Department of Review must take over any non-optimum product of the organization, whether a technical project, an activity, a student or a preclear and bring about an attainment of the expected result regardless of obstacles. The orders, rules, regulations, policies and routes relating to this department were intended to assist it and expedite the carrying out of its purpose. Therefore no order, rule, regulation, policy or route may be used to swerve the Department of Review from its prime purpose of ensuring that the results of Scientology are excellent and consistent. THE DEPARTMENT OF CERTIFICATIONS AND AWARDS The Department of Certifications and Awards has the prime purpose in all its functions: "TO HELP RON ISSUE AND RECORD VALID ATTESTATIONS OF SKILL, STATE AND MERIT HONESTLY DESERVED, ATTAINED OR EARNED BY BEINGS, ACTIVITIES OR AREAS." The validity of issue and decrying any false issue are the concerns of the Department of Certifications and Awards. The Department is fully within its rights to recommend issue when it is unjustly denied or to refuse issue when it is obviously riot in keeping with its prime purpose. The orders, rules, regulations, policies and routes were intended to assist it and expedite the carrying out of its purpose. Therefore no order, rule, regulation, policy or route may deny the personnel of the Department the right to carry out its prime purpose as above. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:ml.rd Copyright (c) 1965 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 30 SEPTEMBER 1965 Remimeo [Excerpt] Advisory Councils Advisory Committees STATISTICS FOR DIVISIONS Qual Division 5 - Cash Collected by reason of the Division for the week. This division's certs and grades and awards are all really the Tech Division's work. But we early found that a Qual Division's various services were paid for when good and not when bad. So this division's gross statistic is how much cash was paid-not later collected, for Qual Division services. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:ml.rd Copyright (c) 1965 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [Excerpted from HCO P/L 30 September 1965, Statistics for Divisions. A complete copy of this P/L in in Volume 1, page 328. It was later amended by HCO P/Ls 29 March 1970, Tech and Qual Stats Revised, page 8; 17 June 1970 Issue II, OIC Change-Cable Change, page 10; 5 February 1971 Issue V, Org Gross Divisional Statistics Revised, page 22; and 5 February 1971 Issue 111, FEBC Executive Director Org GDSes, in the 1971 Year Book.] 2 [chart] QUALIFICATIONS DIVISION 5 TECHNICAL DIVISION 4 1 DISTRIBUTION DIVISION QUALIFICATIONS SECRETARY III TECHNICAL SECRETARY QUALIFICATIONS SEC SEC. DISTRIBUTION SECRET I I TECHNICAL SEC. SEC. DISTRIBUTION SEC. 8 I RESULT CORRECTION ABILITY I ACTIVITY PRODUCTION Department 13 Department 14 Department 15 PURPOSES CLEARING Department 11 Department 12 Department 16 Department 17 DEPARTMENT OF DEPARTMENT OF DEPARTMENT OF DEPARTMENT OF DEPARTMENT OF EXAMINATIONS REVIEW CERTIFICATION DEPARTMENT OF DEPARTMENT OF TRAINING PROCESSING & AWARDS PUBLIC CLEARING INFORMATION Director of Director of Director of Director of Director of Director of Director of Training Processing Examinations Review Certification Public Clearing & Awards Information Copyright (c) 1965, 1967 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED THE PROMOTIONAL ACTIONS OF QUALIFICATIONS DIVISION 5 (From HCO PL 20 November 1965, The Promotional Actions of an Organization, with the additions 81a and 85a from HCO PL 15 December 1965 and HCO PL 4 February 1966. These are given complete for all divisions in Basic Staff Volume 0, starting on page 84.) 72. QUALIFICATIONS SECRETARY -. Co-ordinates and gets done the promotional functions of Division 5. 73. DEPARTMENT 13 (Dept of Examinations) - Makes sure no untrained student or unsolved case gets past. 74. Finds the real errors in any failures (no student or pc ever gets upset if the actual error is spotted-they only get upset when a wrong error is found). 75. Refuses to get so concentrated on "validating people" that errors are overlooked for this backfires also. 76. Routes those passed quickly to Certs and Awards and those failed quickly to Review and routes any Ethics matters discovered promptly to Ethics. 77. DEPARTMENT 14 (Dept of Review) - Quickly repairs any flat ball bearings turned out by the Tech Division so they will be no discredit to org. 78. Gives brilliant standard isolation of any errors in students or pcs-discovers them with ease. 79. Repairs thoroughly. 80. Makes a continual effort to get failed cases in the field or ARC Broken Scientologists in for a Review. 81. Sends to Ethics all Ethics matters discovered. Cultivates an aura of effortless competence. 81 a. Review makes the dissatisfied satisfied with the Org by remedying all tech misses. 82. DEPARTMENT 15 (Dept of Certs and Awards) - Issues credentials that will be seen around-pins that people will wear, certificates they will hang up, cards they will show. 83. Never issues anything falsely as it will be hidden or discredited. 84. Issues literature to all new releases and other completions that tells them what they have attained and what next to do and encourages them to do it. 85. Heavily promotes auditors outside the org to bring in their pcs for examination and Release declarations. 85 a. Pushes along the Free Membership programme and makes sure Accounts sends a bill for the next year's Membership the moment the six months expires AND IS ITS STATISTIC. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:ml.rd Copyright (c) 1965 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 4 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 2 NOVEMBER 1967 Remimeo HCO Exec Sec Hat Org Exec Sec Hat Qual Sec Hat Dept of Exams Hats Dept of Review Hats Dept of C & A Hats QUALIFICATIONS DIVISION, DEPARTMENTS OF EXAMINATIONS, REVIEW AND CERTIFICATIONS AND AWARDS All Organization Boards are to be posted in accordance with the following line-up which complies with HCO Policy Letter of February 28, 1966 entitled, "Danger Condition Data, Why Organizations Stay Small": DEPARTMENT OF EXAMINATIONS Director of Examinations QUAL INTERVIEW & INVOICE SECTION Qual Interview & Invoice In-charge Qual Invoice Clerk Qual Routing Clerk Qual Folder Clerk Qual Invoice Routing Clerk Qual Page STUDENT EXAMINATIONS SECTION Student Examinations In-charge Certification Examiner Classification Examiner Examination Marker Practical Demonstrations Examiner PC EXAMINATIONS SECTION Pc Examinations In-charge HGC Pc Examiners Student Pc Examiners CLEAR CHECKING SECTION Clear Checker OT CHECKING SECTION OT Checker DEPARTMENT OF REVIEW Director of Review CASE SECTION Chief Case Officer CASE OFFICER UNIT Case Officers CASE REVIEW UNIT I Leading Review Auditor Unit I Review Auditors 5 CASE REVIEW UNIT 2 Leading Review Auditor Unit 2 Review Auditors CRAMMING SECTION Chief Cramming Officer Cramming Officers STAFF SECTION Staff Section Officer STAFF TRAINING UNIT Chief Staff Training Officer Staff Training Officers STAFF REVIEW UNIT Chief Staff Review Officer Staff Review Officers Org Exec Course Org Exec Course Supervisor Org Exec Course Administrator INTERN TRAINING SECTION Intern Training Officer ORG REVIEW & CORRECTION SECTION Org Review and Correction DEPARTMENT OF CERTS AND AWARDS Director of Certs & Awards INVOICE SECTION Invoice Clerk LOGGING SECTION Logging Clerk CERTIFICATE & AWARDS PREPARATION SECTION Certificate & Awards Preparation Clerk CERTIFICATE & AWARDS STOCK SECTION Certificate & Awards Stock Clerk MEMBERSHIP SECTION Membership In-charge Membership Index Card Clerk Membership Card Preparation Clerk Membership Card Issuance Clerk Memberships Promotion Clerk Mary Sue Hubbard The Guardian WW for L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:jp.rd Copyright 1967 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 6 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 2 NOVEMBER 1967 [Excerpt] CHAPLAIN'S SECTION Chaplain Chaplain's Court Arbiter Chaplain's Court Clerk Chaplain's Court Files Clerk Sunday Services Promotion Clerk Chaplain's Sunday Services Assistant Mary Sue Hubbard The Guardian WW for L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:jp.rd Copyright 1967 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [Excerpted from HCO Policy Letter of 2 November 1967, Distribution Division, Departments Of Public information, Clearing and Success. A complete copy is in Volume 6, page 9.] HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 17 JUNE 1968 Issue II (Corrects HCO PL 2 November 1967 Dissem Division and HCO PL 2 November 1967 Qualifications Division) Remimeo ARC BREAK REGISTRARS AND AUDITORS ARC BREAK REGISTRARS AND AUDITORS ARE RELOCATED IN QUAL TO WORK AS A TEAM. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:js.rd Copyright (c) 1968 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 29 OCTOBER 1968 Remimeo STAT FOR CLASS VIII C/S QUAL IS NUMBER NAMES IN CF. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:ei.rd Copyright (c) 1968 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 7 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 29 MARCH 1970 [Excerpt] Remimeo QUAL STATS REVISED (Amends HCO P/Ls 30 Sept 65 "Statistics for Divisions", 22 Sept 69 "HGC Statistic" and 27 Apr 67 "Tech Division Statistic" and 31 Mar 69 "OIC Report Forms") Qual statistics are hereby revised as follows: QUALIFICATIONS DIVISION Qual See: 1. GI divided by total number on staff. 2. Total number of creditable success stories received less total number of poor success stories received. Dir Exams: 1. Total number of pcs completed on a grade, intensive or review action with very good indicators. 2. Total number of outnesses reported. Dir Review: 1. Total number of auditors who have an "OK to Audit" and total number of Supervisors who have an "OK to supervise" who are actually auditing and supervising. 2. Total number of students or pcs corrected who paid in full, plus staff corrected with VGIs. Qual CIS: Total number of active auditors on staff. Dir C & A: Total number of certs issued. Cramming Officer: Total number of students completed less total number of students back to Cramming on the same level of training. Staff Training Officer: Total number of hours attended by staff on staff training divided by the total number on staff. Qual Consultant: Total number of students routed back on course. Note that these statistics stress the inter-dependence of Tech and Qual with the rest of the org and reflect the actual production in terms of result. It may not be realized that the Qual statistic "GI divided by total number on Staff" is in fact an industrial statistic which accurately shows the value of each staff member. Judy Ziff D/CS-5 for L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:JZ:nt.ei.rd Copyright (c) 1970 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [Excerpt (c) from HCO P/L of 29 March 1970, Tech and Qual Stats Revised, a complete copy of which is to in the 1970 Year Book. It was later cancelled by HCO P/L 17 June 1970 Issue II, OIC Change-Cable Change, page 10.] NOT HCO POLICY LETTER CORRECT COLOUR FLASH BLUE ON WHITE EXECUTIVE DIRECTIVE FROM L. RON HUBBARD LRH ED 107 INT [Excerpt) 3 June 1970 To: Class IV Orgs and Saint Hills for ACTION. AOs for Info. From: Ron Subject: ORDERS TO DIVISIONS FOR IMMEDIATE COMPLIANCE [ORDERS TO DIVISION V-Excerpted] Reference: LRH ED 104 INT Auditing Sales and Delivery Pgm No. 1, LRH ED 106 INT What Was Wrong DIVISION V 1. The purpose of Division V is to CORRECT malfunctions in the org. Realize that the whole org has moved into Div V and squashed it. Begin a program of unloading functions. 2. Shift the CIS to Div IV. There is no Div V CIS. The Review Auditor does his own C/Sing on cases he repairs. 3. Refuse to do any major actions on cases. Repair them so they will now run and shift them back to Div IV. 4. Get in DECLARE discipline at the Examiners. Refuse to declare more than one grade at a time. Get the pc to state the ability he has attained, not "I'm Level 0 now" but the exact wording of that grade. Refuse flatly to pass any pc run only on one process for a grade as disclosed by folder inspection. Get the earliest Examiner discipline in. Folder, meter, pc statement as to the exact end phenomena of the Grade. Student by examination and meter check for false completion. 5. Refuse to back down when anyone in Tech starts yelling you're invalidating their gains or repute. That's how all this decline started-an invalidation of Qual opinion by the Tech See at SH 1965. Wiped out Qual. Five years later the subject was gone over the whole world and having to be put back. 6. Provide helpful service to students and pcs. Make them feel especially safe in Qual. 7. Really repair students with your interest, 2 way comm and learning drills (they'll be coming out in HCO B again shortly). 8. Really repair pcs using assessed lists like the GF, L1B, L4A, ruds, etc so they're flying. 9. Take credit from Tech for every auditing hour (or part thereof costs an hour) you spend on a pc Take all pc repair from hours pc has bought. Only if he has run out of Tech hours and needs repair do you charge him. Try to get him to buy a new package of hours as soon as possible-but of course a pc needing repair isn't likely to buy more until repaired. 10. Get in your Staff Training Officer (who in small orgs can also be Cramming) and begin to push the staff through Staff Status I and 11 and III and OEC so the org form will be held and thus keep the org from being in a continual correction status. 11. Get your Certs and Awards requiring all certs to be signed by the HCO Area See (or HCO ES) before they are valid. Get the signed cert routed back for presentation by the Registrar to the pc or student. 12. Give me a great big hand getting this Auditing Sales and Service Pgm No. I IN so that it stays in and totally assume the function of org correction for which Qual was designed. Qual was meant to do Product Correction and Org Correction. It got so bad Qual became the Product Division not the Product Correction Division. So help me out by getting the org to be a service org producing pcs run on all grade processes for each grade and auditors who know they use what they learn. [seal] L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dz.rd 9 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 17 JUNE 1970 Remimeo Issue II All Orgs, [Excerpt] Scn and URGENT so OIC CHANGE - CABLE CHANGE (Effective for the week beginning 24 July 1970 and ending for first report 30 July 1970 and continuing thereafter.) (Cancels HCO PL 29 Mar 70, Tech and Qual Stats.) (Amends HCO PL 30 Sept 65, Statistics for Divisions.) Qual Stars are revised as follows: QUALIFICATIONS DIVISION Qual See and GDS: 1. The amount of money paid for student training into the org for a certificate course. (All solo excepted.) 2. The number of creditable success stories turned in less 2 points for every no-story and less 2 more points for every ethics action taken on a student, pc or staff member. Dir Exams: 1. I point for every non F/N Examiner Report. (It being understood that an Examining Report is done after every session.) 2. 10 points for every uncertain or flunked student. (It being understood that students are given meter checks by Examiner and spot Exams for every theory or practical completion.) Note: Each of the 2 Examiner stats loses 100 points for each proven instance of evaluation, invalidation of students or pcs by expression or statement by the Examiner, instances of penalty to be decided by Qual See, Div 6 See and a third member agreed upon by the two. Dir Review: 1. Errors discovered and corrected in pcs' folders, I point for each plus 10 points for each student completed with VGls. 2. Number of falsely signed off items on Div IV checksheets corrected in Cramming. Cramming Officer: See No. 2 Dir Review. Staff Training Officer: 1. GI divided by the number of people. 2. Course completions by staff members. Qual Consultant: 1. Number of staff, students and pcs spotted in the org during week with BIs. 2. Number of BIs routed or handled. No Qual C/S Stat as there now isn't one. Review Auditor: 1. Errors discovered and corrected in pcs' folders, I point for each. 2. 10 points for each pc completed with VGls. Dir C & A: 1. Number of classifications rejected by reason of inadequate case gain or false representations. 2. Number of awards refused by reason of inadequate hours or abilities for the level not attained. It will be noted that these statistics reflect the original design of Tech and Qual and do not favor "Quickie Grades" for pcs, inabilities in auditors, unpaid staffs or an ARC Broken field. Accuracy in compiling these stats, posting them weekly where they can be seen and managing on the basis of these is a survival factor in an org. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.ka.rd Copyright (c) 1970 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [Excerpted from HCO Policy Letter of 17 June 1970, Issue 11, OIC Change-Cable Change. A complete copy is in Volume 1, page 359.] [Amended by HCO P/Ls 5 February 1971 Issue V, Org Gross Divisional Statistics Revised, page 22, and 5 February 1971 Issue III, FEBC Executive Director Org GDSes, in the 1971 Year Book.] 10 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 15 JULY 1970 Remimeo Issue II EC Hats Qual Div Hats REORGANIZATION OF THE CORRECTION DIVISION (TO BE USED AT ONCE ON ORG BDS. SUBJECT TO MODIFICATION WITH EXPERIENCE.) The three departments of Correction Div V are reorganized as given on the following Org Board. AWARENESS LEVELS: Dept 13 - ENHANCEMENT Dept 14 - CORRECTION Dept 15 - VALIDITY DIVISION FIVE CORRECTION DIVISION 8 Qualification Secretary M Dept 13 DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL ENHANCEMENT 6 Director of Personnel Enhancement M PERSONNEL OBSER VA TION SECTION M Status Unit: Inspects staff for out-points in duty performance or any needful Training and case cycles. Collects data from Examiner, Personnel I/C, Org Seniors, Ethics files, Ethics Officer, Medical Officer, Chaplain, Course Supervisor, Course Admin, Hats Officer, STO, Personal Folder, Case Supervisor and Org Council. Reports data to Data Analysis Unit. B Data Analysis Unit: Applies Data Series HCO P/Ls to find personnel needing improvement. Sends names and data to Reports Unit. P Reports Unit: Gets any further data necessary. Sends CSW to Staff Programming Section. B STAFF PROGRAMMING SECTION M Hubbard Consultant Unit: Does Consultation on current status. Relays data to Programming Unit or Dept 15. B Programming Unit: Reviews folder. Locates personnel's needs on Management Chart. Targets out program of Processing and Training for increased value to themselves and the Org. P Routing Unit: Routes personnel to first step on Program. Posts personnel names on Personnel Enhancement Board. P STAFF TRAINING AND STAFF AUDITING SECTION M Staff Training Officer: Training, Admin and Inspection Unit. 11 Keeps all Admin for the section. Keeps attendance up on training cycles and programs. Inspects and 8c's all training cycles in the Org and gives checkouts. Liaises closely with Personnel Bureau and keeps them informed of increased staff member value. B Staff Training Unit: (Has a separate unit for all classes of staff enhancement cycles: OEC, Interneship, etc.) Sees personnel successfully through staff enhancement cycles. P Staff Auditing Unit: Collects staff folders from Tech Services. Gets staff folders CSed by the Tech CS. Staff Staff Auditors audit staff. B Dept 14 DEPARTMENT OF ORGANIZATION CORRECTION 0 Director of Organization Correction M ORGANIZA TION SITUA TION RECOGNITION SECTION M Org Perception Unit: Knows the correct ideal scenes related to purpose and time of all parts of the entire Org. Collects data of GI and all Org GDSes and departmental statistics, post hats, packs of divisional duties and descriptions of Org lines, etc. B Org Data Analysis Unit: Surveys for out-points the collected data of the existing Org scene and sub-scenes. P Org Situation Analysis Unit: Knows the statistics that should exist. Produces summaries of situations regarding the Org form and sends to Org Correction Section. B ORG CORRECTION SECTION M Org Inspection Unit: Inspects situations more closely. Calls Boards of Investigation to go over GDSes that are down. Finds out WHY a departure from an ideal scene, what changed and isolates the change. Establishes the hat material missing, which divisional duties are not being done, which hats are not being worn and details of Org lines which do not flow, etc. Looks for the basic Org Outnesses. B Org Correction Unit: Establishes the need to handle situations. Elvaluates resources available and capability. Looks into the Reality of Hat write ups and corrects to Ideal Scene. Expansion of Data in Hats. Passes correction data to Correction Program Unit. P Correction Program Unit: Writes up programs which correct, undo harmful changes and revert to the ideal scenes Uses a gradient solution. P OR G IDEAL SCENE A TTAINMENT SECTION M Org Prediction Unit: Ensures that all the functions of the Org are taking place. (Each Production Unit of the Org is represented in this Unit.) Settles practical aspects of correction programs. 12 B Org Reestablishment Unit: Gets situations handled by implementation of the correction programs. Gets hats re-written, packs of Divisional Duties, etc formed, Org lines straight and flowing and changes reverted so that production increases by statistics. P Org Correction Verification Unit: Sees that every sub-ideal scene and the ideal scene is returned to, or attained, and is verified by production statistics. Successful and unsuccessful Org correction actions are written up and made known to seniors. P Dept 15 DEPARTMENT OF TECHNICAL CORRECTION 0 Director of Technical Correction M EXAMINA TIONS SECTION M Examiner Unit: Inspects the product and verifies that results have been attained. B Consultant and Medical Officer Unit: Uses two way comm to establish what needs correcting. Inspects Medical and hygiene aspect of product. Arranges or administers Medical Care. P Routing Unit: Routes the product back to its Production Unit, or on to Correction Section or Certs and Awards Section. B PRODUCT CORRECTION SECTION M Logging Unit: Logs all products coming in for correction and corrected products going out. B Product Correction Unit: (Each production unit is represented in this unit: i.e. Pc Correction - Review Unit. Student Correction - Cramming Unit.) Corrects products of production units. P Admin Unit: Keeps materials and records of correction actions. Has a Bull Pen where all unresolving data is kept for final resolution. P CER IS AND A WARDS SECTION M Completion Logging Unit: Logs all products that have been completed. B Certs and Awards Unit: Attests as to skill, state and merit of product. P Admin Unit: Keeps stocks of certificates and symbols. LRH:JF:sb.ka.rd D/CS-5 Copyright (c) 1970 for by L. Ron Hubbard L. RON HUBBARD ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Founder [Amended by HCO P/L 8 August 1970 Issue 111, Reorganization of the Correction Division, page 14. Cancelled by HCO P/L 7 December 1971 Issue IV, Correction Division-Purposes, Ideal Scenes, Products, Statistics, page 35.1 13 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 8 AUGUST 1970 Issue III Remimeo EC Hats (Amends HCO Policy Letter 15 July '70. Qual Div Hats Various Div V functions are added.) REORGANIZATION OF THE CORRECTION DIVISION (TO BE USED AT ONCE ON ORG BOARDS. SUBJECT TO MODIFICATION WITH EXPERIENCE.) The three departments of Correction Div V are reorganized as given on the following Org Board. AWARENESS LEVELS: Dept 13 - ENHANCEMENT Dept 14 - CORRECTION Dept 15 - VALIDITY DIVISION FIVE CORRECTION DIVISION 0 Qualification Secretary M Dept 13 DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL ENHANCEMENT 0 Director of Personnel Enhancement M PERSONNEL OBSERVATION SECTION M Status Unit: Inspects staff for out-points in duty performance or any needful Training and case cycles. Collects data from Examiner, Personnel I/C, Org Seniors, Ethics files, Ethics Officer, Medical Officer, Chaplain, Course Supervisor, Course Admin, Hats Officer, STO, Personal Folder, Case Supervisor and Org Councils. Reports data to Data Analysis Unit. B Data Analysis Unit: Applies Data Series HCO P/Ls to find personnel needing improvement. Sends names and data to Reports Unit. P Reports Unit: Gets any further data necessary. Sends CSW to Staff Programming Section. B MEDICAL-HYGIENE SECTION M Inspections Unit: Does daily inspections, liaises with Inspections and Reports. Reports to Orders of the Day and appropriate terminals to handle outnesses. 14 B Medical-Hygiene Unit: Administers Medical care. Acts to improve Health and Hygiene of staff. Arranges professional medical care as needed. Keeps supplies for normal and emergency use. P Completions Unit: Keeps all reports, logs, inventories, records and files in present time. B STAFF PROGRAMMING SECTION M Hubbard Consultant Unit: Does Consultation on current status. Relays data to Programming Unit or Dept 15. B Programming Unit: Reviews folder. Locates personnel's needs on Management Chart. Targets out program of Processing and Training for increased value to themselves and the Org. P Routing Unit: Routes personnel to first step on Program. Posts personnel names on Personnel Enhancement Board. P STAFF TRAINING AND STAFF AUDITING SECTION M Staff Technical Services Unit: Keeps all Staff Student and Case Folder Admin. Keeps up-to-date the Staff Auditing Scheduling Board and the Staff Student Progress Board. Rounds up pcs for Staff Staff Auditors. Liaises closely with Personnel Bureau and keeps them informed of increased staff member value. B Staff Training Unit: Staff Training Officer sees that staff do train, keeps attendance up and gives checkouts. In Scn and SO Orgs there is a separate unit for all staff enhancement cycles: Org Exec Course Supervisor runs OEC. C/S Internship Supervisor runs C/S Internship, etc. Sees personnel successfully through staff enhancement cycles. P Staff Auditing Unit: Gets Folder Summaries and Folder Error Summaries of Staff Case folders done and C/Sed. Staff Case Supervisor C/Ses staff folders in a large org, otherwise done by Staff Staff Auditors, C/S Interns or Tech C/S. Staff Staff Auditors audit staff. 15 B Dept 14 DEPARTMENT OF ORGANIZATION CORRECTION a Director of Organization Correction M ORGANIZATION SITUATION RECOGNITION SECTION M Org Perception Unit: Knows the correct ideal scenes related to purpose and time of all parts of the entire Org. Collects data of GI and all Org GDSes and departmental statistics, post hats, packs of divisional duties and descriptions of Org lines, etc. B Org Data Analysis Unit: Surveys for out-points the collected data of the existing Org scene and sub-scenes. P Org Situation Analysis Unit: Knows the statistics that should exist. Produces summaries of situations regarding the Org form and sends to Org Correction Section. B OR G CORRECTION SECTION M Org Inspection Unit: Inspects situations more closely. Calls Boards of Investigation to go over GDSes that are down. Finds out WHY a departure from an ideal scene, what changed and isolates the change. Establishes the hat material missing, which divisional duties are not being done, which hats are not being worn and details of Org lines which do not flow, etc. Looks for the basic Org Outnesses. B Org Correction Unit: Establishes the need to handle situations. Evaluates resources available and capability. Looks into the Reality of Hat write ups and corrects to Ideal Scene. Expansion of data in Hats. Passes correction data to Correction Program Unit. P Correction Program Unit: Writes up programs which correct, undo harmful changes and revert to the ideal scenes. Uses a gradient solution. P ORG IDEAL SCENE A TTAINMENT SECTION M Org Prediction Unit: Ensures that all the functions of the Org are taking place. (Each Production Unit of the Org is represented in this Unit.) Settles practical aspects of correction programs. B Org Reestablishment Unit: Gets situations handled by implementation of the correction programs. Gets Hats re-written, packs of Divisional Duties, etc formed, Org lines straight and flowing and changes reverted so that production increases by statistics. P Org Correction Verification Unit: Sees that every sub-ideal scene and the ideal scene is returned to, or attained, and is verified by production statistics. Successful and unsuccessful Org correction actions are written up and made known to seniors. 16 P Dept 15 DEPARTMENT OF PRODUCT VALIDITY 0 Director of Product Validity M EXAMINA TIONS SECTION M Examiner Unit: Inspects. the product and verifies that results have been attained. B Consultant, Medical Liaison Officer and ARC Break Registrar Unit: Uses 2-way comm to establish what needs correcting. Liaises with the Medical Officer for staff and with Medical Practitioners for staff and public as necessary. ARC Break Registrar programs the recovery of and signs up ARC broken Dianeticists and Scientologists from the field for the ARC Break Auditor to handle. P Routing Unit: Routes the product back to its Production Unit, or on to Correction Section or Certs and Awards Section. B PRODUCT CORRECTION SECTION M Logging Unit: Logs all products coming in for correction and corrected products going out. B Product Correction Unit: (Each Production Unit is represented in this Unit: i.e. Pc CorrectionReview Unit, which has Review Auditors. Student Correction-Cramming Unit, run by the Cramming Officer.) Corrects products of production units. ARC Break Auditor handles ARC breaks, pulls overts, and gets in Life Ruds. P Admin Unit: Keeps materials and records of correction actions. Has a Bull Pen where all unresolving data is kept for final resolution. P CER IS AND AWARDS SECTION M Completion Logging Unit: Logs all products that have been completed. B Certs and Awards Unit: Attests as to skill, state and merit of product. P Admin Unit: Keeps stocks of certificates and symbols. D/CS-5 LRH:JF:rr.rd for Copyright (c) 1970 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard Founder ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [Cancelled by HCO P/L 7 December 1971 Issue IV, page 35.1 17 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 22 SEPTEMBER 1970 Issue II Remimeo IDEAL SCENES AND STATISTICS FOR CORRECTION DIVISION FIVE THE IDEAL SCENE OF QUAL (Correction Division Five) and the QUALIFICATIONS SECRETARY To see that any departures from the Ideal Scene of the Org, its staff and quality of results and products are detected and quickly corrected. STATISTIC: Number of Div V correction cycles successfully completed. --------------- Calculated: For Org corrections, one point for every Org situation recognised, written up as a fully targeted correction program and then all targets having been completed with the situation handled and the Ideal Scene established. For Product Validity corrections, one point for every successful completion of a correction program which was written in target form to correct an auditor, case supervisor, pc, pre OT, supervisor, student, staff member or any other non-optimum Org product and which resulted in increased ability. Dept 13 DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL ENHANCEMENT Ideal Scene: An Org in which all its personnel are specialists on their posts having attained their abilities through auditing, tech and other training and who can improve conditions across the dynamics. Statistic: GI -number on staff. Staff Case Supervisor Ideal Scene: All staff being successfully audited to increased abilities in handling others and their own lines and mest. Statistic: 1. Percentage of staff who are in good case condition measured by the last Examiner Reports and cancelled by any adverse Exam report. (Calculated as per HCO Pol Ltr 20 Jul '70 [Technical] Cases and Morale of Staff: The number of folders in Staff Case Category No. I as a percentage of the number on staff.) 2. Number of staff cases C/Sed. PERSONNEL ENHANCEMENT SECTION Personnel Enhancement Officer Ideal Scene: Correctly establishes situations with regard to Org Personnel and establishes correct Personnel Enhancement Programs which result in optimum abilities for each Org personnel to operate across the dynamics. Sees that these abilities are attained by having staff folders available and training and auditing materials complete and Enhancement, Progress and scheduling boards in present time. Statistic: 1. Number of study points, based on Flag authorised point system, achieved by staff as students following written and agreed upon Staff Enhancement Programs. 2. Number of Well Done and Very Well Done hours audited on staff cases as a result of staff members following written and agreed upon Staff Enhancement Programs. is Medical Officer Ideal Scene: All staff well and healthy and hygienic with the overall standard of health continuously increasing. Statistic: 1. Percentage of staff well from medical ills (i.e. not on medical lines AND not on out personal hygiene lines). 2. Number of sick staff now well and routed off Medical Officer lines plus number of out personal hygiene cycles handled to Medical Officer's satisfaction. STAFF TRAINING SECTION Staff Training Officer Ideal Scene: All staff being Tech and Admin trained making good progress and attaining specialist abilities. Statistic: 1. Total number of staff student study points based on Flag authorised point system, less 1,000 for every staff member not on course for the week. 2. Course completions by staff members. STAFF AUDITING SECTION Leading Staff Staff Auditors and Staff Staff Auditors Ideal Scene: All staff cases kept flying and being successfully and frequently audited to increased abilities and maintained high morale. Statistic: Number of hours of Well Done and Very Well Done auditing sessions. (If no C/S the Staff Staff Auditors share the Staff C/S percentile stat.) Dept 14 DEPARTMENT OF ORGANIZATION CORRECTION Director of Organization Correction Ideal Scene: An Org that is effectively and causatively managed on statistics and which is rapidly corrected where departures from its Ideal Scenes and Sub-Ideal Scenes occur. An Org where correct hats are worn, Org lines are fast and smooth and all Divisional materials are available to individual staff members. An Org where policy is known and used, with Org rudiments in and Departmental checklists complete. An Org that does not produce nonoptimum products and with all statistics which are based on Ideal Scenes on an uptrend. An Org where conditions for others and its personnel are improved. Statistic: Sum of points of each Unit, Section, Departmental, Divisional and Org conditions assigned on stats calculated on: Non-existence = -3, Danger = -2, Emergency = - 1, Normal = + 1, Affluence = +2, Power = +3. ORGANIZATION SITUATION RECOGNITION SECTION Organization Situation Recognition Officer Ideal Scene: Correctly analysed major departures from the Organization Ideal Scene which are quickly acted upon to the completion of the correction cycle. Statistic: Sum of points of each Unit, Section, Departmental, Divisional and Org conditions assigned on stats calculated on: Non-existence = -3, Danger = -2, Emergency = -1, Normal = +1, Affluence = +2, Power = +3, PLUS one for every Org outness reported to the Org Correction Section and acted upon with a correction action which has resulted in an increased stat. 19 ORGANIZATION CORRECTION SECTION Organization Correction Officer Ideal Scene: Correctly programs the correction of an Org Situation so that it quickly reverts to the Org Ideal Scene through implementation of the Correction Program. Statistic: Sum of points of each Unit, Section, Departmental, Divisional and Org conditions assigned on stats calculated on: Non-existence = -3, Danger = -2, Emergency = -1, Normal = + 1, Affluence = +2, Power = +3, PLUS one for every effective corrective action taken which has resulted in an increased stat. ORGANIZATIONAL IDEAL SCENE ATTAINMENT SECTION Organization Ideal Scene Attainment Officer Ideal Scene: An Org with all statistics based on Ideal Scenes on a rising trend and correction cycles swiftly handled. An Org with great community potential and Area Control. Statistic: Sum of points of each Unit, Section, Departmental, Divisional and Org conditions assigned on stats calculated on: Non-existence = -3, Danger = -2, Emergency = -1, Normal = +1, Affluence = +2, Power = +3, MINUS one for every 5% of all the Departmental Admin Checklists not complete. Dept 15 DEPARTMENT OF PRODUCT VALIDITY Director of Product Validity Ideal Scene: An Org whose products are flawless and where the technology of Optimum Survival is known and used and is forced to be viewed where it is not known and used. Nonoptimum products of the Org rapidly and successfully corrected and none allowed to leave which are not optimum with no flaws missed. Statistic: Number of Dept 15 correction cycles successfully completed. Calculated by one point for every successful completion of a correction program which was written in target form to correct an auditor, case supervisor, pc, pre OT, supervisor, student or staff member and which resulted in increased ability for that person MINUS 100 for every correction cycle ordered by a senior Org Qual to handle a non-optimum product which was allowed to leave the Org. EXAMINATIONS SECTION Examiner Ideal Scene: Distant location of bad indicators and product flaws. Statistic: Number of students and pcs examined PLUS one point for every person with bad indicators routed, (BI's include every non F/N Examiner Report, it being understood that an Examiner Report is done after every session) PLUS ten points for every uncertain or flunked student. (It being understood that students are given meter checks by Examiner and spot Exams for every theory or practical completion.) Note: The Examiner stat loses 100 points for each proven instance of evaluation, invalidation of students or pcs by expression or statement by the Examiner, instances of penalty to be decided by Qual See, Div 6 See and a third member agreed upon by the two. ARC Break Registrar Ideal Scene: Spots and recovers ARC Broken Dianeticists and Scientologists from the field. 20 Statistic: Number of ARC Broken and/or blown Dianeticists and Scientologists contacted and put back on Org lines during the week. CORRECTION SECTION Review Consultant Ideal Scene: Staff, students and pcs having difficulty swiftly handled. Statistic: Number of staff, students and pcs who are having difficulty, interviewed and handled. Cramming Supervisor Ideal Scene: Swift handling of technical misses in student's knowledge. Statistic: 1, Number of falsely signed off items on Div IV and Dept 13 checksheets corrected in Cramming. 2. Ten points for every student completed with VGI's. Leading Review Auditor and Review Auditors Ideal Scene: Swift handling of bogged cases and correction of goofing auditors and C/Ses. Statistic: 1, Errors discovered and corrected in pcs, folders, one point for each. 2. Ten points for each pc completed with VGI's. ARC Break Auditor Ideal Scene: Swiftly handled ARC Broken cases. Statistic: Number of previously ARC Broken and blown pcs, and students handled successfully in the week. CERTIFICATES AND AWARDS SECTION Certificates and Awards Officer Ideal Scene: Validates flawless products while getting any non-optimum product of the Org corrected. Statistic: 1. Number of classifications rejected by reason of inadequate case gain or false representations. 2. Number of awards refused by reason of inadequate hours or abilities for the level not attained. D/CS- 5 for LRH:JF:sb.ka.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright(c) 1970 Founder by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [Amended by HCO P/Ls 5 February 1971 Issue V, Org Gross Divisional Statistics Revised, page 22, and 5 February 1971 Issue II1, FEBC Executive Director Org GDSes, in the 1971 'Year Book. Cancelled by HCO P/L 7 December 1971 issue IV, Correction Division-Purposes, Ideal Scene$, Products, Statistics, page 35.) 21 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 5 FEBRUARY 1971 Issue V [Excerpt] Remimeo OIC WW CLOs EC: Hat HAS Hat OIC Hat ORG GROSS DIVISIONAL STATISTICS REVISED (Amends HCO Pol Ltr 30 Sept 65 - Stats for Divisions, HCO PL 17 June 70 - OIC Change, Cable Change, HCO PL 22 Sept 70 - Ideal Scenes & Stats for Correction Div 5, Page 1, GDS for Div 5 only.) QUAL DIVISION 5 1 . The total amount of money paid for student training into the org for a Certificate Course (all Solo excepted). 2. The total number of creditable success stories turned in, less the number of people not passing Key Questions, and less 2 for any Ethics action taken on a student, preclear or staff member for the week. 3. Gross Income divided by number of persons on staff for the week. HCO Aide for L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:HE:mes.rd Copyright (c) 1971 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [Excerpted from HCO Policy Letter of 5 February 1971, Issue V, Org Gross Divisional Statistics Revised. A complete copy covering all divisions is in the 1971 Volume.] 22 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 FEBRUARY 1971 Issue VI Limited Non-Remimeo FEBC Exec Dir Only FEBC ORG BOARD DIVISION 5 DEPARTMENT 13 ENHANCEMENT DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL ENHANCEMENT Director of Personnel Enhancement Staff Case Supervisor STAFF ROUTING AND SERVICES SECTION Staff Routing and Servicing Officer Staff Routing Unit Staff Routing I/C Pages Staff Services Unit Staff Servicing I/C Staff Logging and Books Clerk Staff Materials Supply Clerk Staff Location Clerk Staff Assignment Clerk PERSONNEL ENHANCEMENT SECTION Personnel Enhancement Chief Personnel Inspection Unit Personnel Inspector Personnel Consultant Unit Personnel Consultant Personnel Analysis Unit Personnel Analysing Officer Personnel Programming Unit Personnel Programming Officer Health and Hygiene Unit (AOs and SHs only) Medical Officer Inspections Sub-Unit Hygiene Inspector Records, Reports, Inventories Sub-Unit Records, Reports, Inventories I/C Medical Liaising Sub-Unit Medical Liaising Officer 23 Appointments to Shore I/C Medical Accompanying I/C Visiting I/C Clinic Sub-Unit Clinic Officer Medications I/C First Aid I/C Transportation I/C Visiting I/C Advisement to C/S and Examiner I/C STAFF HA TTING COLLEGE SECTION Dean of Staff Hatting College Staff Hatting College Unit Staff Training Officer Specialist Training Unit Specialist Training Officer STAFF STAFF AUDITING SECTION Leading Staff Auditor Unit A Staff Staff Auditing Unit A Leading Staff Staff Auditor Unit A Staff Staff Auditors Unit B Staff Staff Auditing Unit B Leading Staff Staff Auditor Unit B Staff Staff Auditors PERSONNEL ENHANCEMENT MATERIAL, EQUIPMENT AND MAINTENANCE SECTION Personnel Enhancement Material, Equipment and Maintenance Officer Staff Library Unit Staff Librarian Staff Training Equipment Unit Training Equipment Supply I/C Training Equipment Maintenance Clerk A VALUABLE FINAL PRODUCT OF THE DEPARTMENT AND THE ORG: EFFECTIVE AND WELL TRAINED ORG STAFF MEMBERS DEPARTMENT 14 CORRECTION DEPARTMENT OF ORGANIZATION CORRECTION Director of Organization Correction ORGANIZATION INSPECTION SECTION Organization Chief Inspector Stat Inspection Unit Stat Inspector 24 Org Inspection Unit Org Inspector Org Product Inspection Unit Org Product Inspector Data Collection Unit Data Collection I/C Data Collection Filing Clerk ORGANIZATION SITUATION RECOGNITION SECTION Organization Situation Recognition Officer Statistic Analysis Unit Statistic Analyser Data Analysis Unit Data Analyser Extreme Conditions Unit Extreme Conditions Evaluator Data Evaluation Unit Data Evaluator PROGRAMMING SECTION Planning and Programming Officer Planning Unit Planning I/C Programming Unit Programming I/C ORGANIZATION CORRECTION SECTION Organization Correction Officer Program Briefing Unit Program Briefer Program Expediting Unit Program Expeditor Program Reports Posting Clerk ORGANIZATION IDEAL SCENE ATTAINMENT SECTION Organization Ideal Scene Attainment Officer Program Debriefing Unit Program Debriefer Ideal Scene Verification Unit Ideal Scene Verifier Program Files Unit Program Filing Clerk PRODUCT: MORE EFFICIENTLY PRODUCED ORG VALUABLE FINAL PRODUCTS 25 DEPARTMENT15 VALIDITY DEPARTMENT OF PRODUCT VALIDITY Director of Product Validity QUAL INTERVIEW AND INVOICE SECTION Interviewing and Invoicing Officer Qual Invoicing Unit Qual Invoicing I/C Qual Routing Unit Qual Routing [/C Pages Qual Folder Unit Qual Folders I/C Qual Consultant Unit Qual Consultant Chaplain Unit Chaplain (Dept 18 Liaison) EXAMINA TIONS SECTION Chief Examiner Student Examinations Unit Student Examining Officer Student Examiner Certificate Examiner Classification Examiner Examinations Marker Practical Demonstration Marker Pc Examinations Unit Pc Examining Officer HGC Pc Examiner Staff Examiner Student Pc Examiner Upper Levels Examiner (St Hills and AOs only) Product Examinations Unit Product Examinations Officer Product Examiner RE VIEW SECTION Review Chief Review Auditing Unit Leading HGC Review Auditor HGC Review Auditors Leading Staff Review Auditor Staff Review Auditors Leading Student Pc Review Auditor Student Pc Review Auditors Cramming Unit Chief Cramming Officer 26 Leading Student Cramming Officer Student Cramming Officers Leading Staff Cramming Officer Staff Cramming Officers Medical Liaising Unit (Orgs Only) Medical Officer Hygiene Inspections Sub-Unit Hygiene Inspector First Aid and Assists Sub-Unit First Aid I/C Assists I/C Medical Liaising Sub-Unit Medical Liaising I/C Advisement to C/S and Exams I/C Medical Accompaniment I/C Medical Reports Records and Inventory Sub-Unit Medical Reports Records and Inventories I/C Medical Unit Filing Clerk ARC BREAK REPAIR SECTION ARC Break Repairing Chief ARC Break Repairing Registration Unit ARC Break Repairing Registrar ARC Break Repairing Auditing Unit ARC Break Repairing Leading Auditor ARC Break Repairing Auditors ARC Break Surveying Unit ARC Break Surveyor CERTS AND A WARDS SECTION Certifying and Awarding Chief Invoicing Unit Invoicing I/C Logging Unit Logging I/C Certificate and Awards Preparation Unit C&A Preparing I/C Certificate and A wards Stock Unit C&A Stocks I/C Certificate and A wards Filing Unit C&A Filing Clerk PRODUCTS: CORRECTED ORG PRODUCTS A VALUABLE FINAL PRODUCT OF THE DEPARTMENT AND THE ORG: EARNED CERTIFICATES AND AWARDS LRH:JR:nt.bh.rd SO Training & Services Aide Copyright(c) 1971 for by L. Ron Hubbard L. RON HUBBARD ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Founder [Amended by HCO P/L 17 February 1971 Issue II1, as it applies to AOs and Saint Hills only, in the 1971 Year Book.] 27 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 2 AUGUST 1971 Issue II Remimeo OIC WW CLOs HAS Hat OIC Hat ADDITIONAL QUAL STAT The statistic for the Word Clearer in Qual is: NUMBER OF WORD CLEARING COMPLETIONS FOR THE WEEK. A word Clearing Completion is defined as: A Method No. I End Phenomena FIN on all subjects on the list including added subjects, done in sessions with in Ruds and carrying an F/N VGIs at Examiner with Success Story. A/Qual Sec FAO for L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH: JvS: sb.rd Copyright (c) 1971 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [The Div V Mini Qual Org Board on opposite page has been twice revised. The original 14 August 1971 issue listed under CRAMMING SECTION in Dept 14 the following: Staff Members, C/Ses, Auditors, Course Supervisors, Staff Training Officer, Staff Processing Officer, Qual Interne Supervisor and Chaplain, The first revision of 5 September 1971 shifted the Chaplain and Staff Training Officer to Dept 13 and added a Staff C/S; deleted Auditors, Course Supervisors and Staff Processing Officer; added Staff Librarian and Staff Information Officer; and created an Interne Section, with a Qual Interne Supervisor in Dept 14. The next revision (shown opposite) added the stars showing which posts must be manned; indicated that Staff C/S is held from above by the Qual Sec; specified the minimum Word Clearing Auditors as two; and combined the posts of Interne Supervisor and Cramming Officer, deleting their appropriate section names, Dept 15 remained the same throughout.] 28 > DIV V MINI QUAL ORG BOARD CORRECTION DIVISION 0 00 QUAL SEC M (c) QUAL SEC for Org Admin ENHANCEMENT VALIDITY 0 DEPARTMENT 13 DEPARTMENT 14 DEPARTMENT 15 IV 0 DEPT OF PERSONNEL ENHANCEMENT DEPT OF CORRECTION DEPT OF VALIDITY > PERSONNEL ENHANCEMENT DIRECTOR CORRECTION DIRECTOR VALIDITY DIRECTOR < Staff C/S (Held by Goal Sec) ORG LIBRARY Staff Training Officer CIO 0 Staff Librarian QUAL INTERVIEW AND INVOICE r, 0 0 > Staff Information Center PERSONNEL PROGRAMMING SECTION > 0 Policy Personnel Programmer Tech (.1 (40 EXAMINER CLEARING SECTION Tapes 0 Packs 2 Word Clearing Auditors > Purpose Clearing Auditors Qual Clearing Page Intern Supervisor/ CERTS AND AWARDS Cramming Officer Chaplain Medical Officer Posts which must be manned. NOT HCO POLICY LETTER CORRECT COLOUR FLASH BLUE ON GREY FLAG DIVISIONAL DIRECTIVE Issued from Flag to all Qual Divisions FDD 18 QUAL INT 2 October 1971 To: Qual Sees All Qua] Staff From: Qual Aide Subject: DIVISIONAL SUMMARY FOR DIVISION V CORRECTION DIVISION (Cancels FDD I DIV 5 FEBC ORGS 28 March, 1971) There is a new Mini Qual Correction Division Org Board, issued in HCO PL 14 August 71, revised 5 Sept 71. It is called a Mini Qual because it is essentially simplified in construction and can be manned and operated by a comparatively small dedicated group of staff, as an initial establishing action. The primary function and purpose of the Qual Correction Division is the FINDING OF LOST TECHNOLOGY. Qual is also the custodian of Knowledge-the books, materials and tapes, plus the meaning contained in these materials. The most essential commodity of an org is KNOWLEDGE. Knowledge gets lost through misunderstood words. Qual finds and restores lost technology to full use through its word clearing, cramming and personnel programming actions, plus the full utilization of the Qual Org Library. This is keeping Scientology working. The Qual See must see that knowledge is not lost and is salvaged where it was lost (alter-ised or misused) and thus ensure that the quality and delivery of org products keeps rising and boom the org. The Qual See must have a Deputy Qual See who takes care of all admin functions in the division and for the org regarding Qual-i.e. FP, Ad Council. This leaves the Qual See free, free and able to put his full attention on running the division and ensuring that its products are being well produced. DEPT 13: DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL ENHANCEMENT AWARENESS LEVEL: ENHANCEMENT The Dept of Personnel Enhancement is run by the Director of Personnel Enhancement. Dept 13 is basically for the org itself. HCO establishes the org but it is primarily Dept 13 which makes it functional- which makes it run. The Valuable Final Product of Dept 13 and the Org is: EFFECTIVE AND WELL TRAINED ORG STAFF MEMBERS. A Staff Case Supervisor is posted in Dept 13. He may or may not have Auditors in Dept 13. This depends on what is the most workable system in the org. It is, however, the responsibility of the Qual See, Dir Personnel Enhancement and the Staff Case Supervisor to see that staff do get audited and that they are properly C/Sed and programmed. It is forbidden for staff to have "bit and piece" auditing. Staff auditing must also be scheduled in intensives. Put a pc label on them and crash them through to a completion every time. The Staff Training Officer has the responsibility for seeing that staff personnel programme training actions are done. It is found by test that staff study runs best in the Academy, even part time. Standard tech courses have their own Supervisor and STO should see that an Admin Supervisor is appointed to run staff admin training periods. Staff study can be staggered to say, three study periods per day, if needed. The important thing is that staff do get and complete study cycles. 30 The Personnel Programmer, through his programming actions, can markedly raise the production and morale of the entire staff and org. The expansion of the org is dependent upon intelligent, well executed personnel programming. He interviews each staff member personally and programmes him to a point of real win on his current post. He never programmes a person off his post. The Personnel Programmer should have a working knowledge of tech and programming of pcs-anything in auditing has a comparable action in the field of programming. He compiles a programme which will really put each staff member there on his post. He works towards creating a whole org of post specialists and uses word clearing liberally. He may have to repair past losses on earlier posts and does what is necessary to ensure that staff members do win on their posts, thus increasing the product quality and delivery of the org. The Personnel Programmer does word clearing method 2 and also utilizes the Qual Word Clearing Word Clearers in all his programmes. Dianetics and Scientology books are included in all programmes-these being essential Knowledge necessary to causative living and working, and which contain the basic data and truths of this universe. The Personnel Programmer should set a personal goal to have all staff read all Dianetics and Scientology books by L. Ron Hubbard. After each staff member is programmed, they are sent to the Registrar to sign up for the first course. It is essential to get this done because it is found that 60% of programmed staff can get lost if not so handled. They are signed up for each action on a no charge invoice. When the Personnel Programmer does his job well, the staff and org will be expanding and product quality rising sharply. The org repute in the area will rise. Word of mouth will increase. The org's publics will be happier and taking more services. The integrity of the org will be raised. Staff morale and production will be shooting up and up. The Personnel Programmer liaises with the org Personnel Control Officer to ensure that all new staff joining the org are sent to him for programming immediately on joining staff. The Qual Clearing Section, under the Qual Clearing Officer is primarily for staff use. This section, with its Word Clearers and Post Purpose Clearers, has the vital new technology of word clearing, which enables Study Data to be fully applied. Word Clearing is the main tool in the org to keep Scientology working and prevent technology or policy from getting lost or misused or altered. The public is going to want Word Clearing and the Qual See is warned that when the public traffic gets to the stage that staff Word Clearing is severely reduced or stalled, that public word clearing should be moved to the Hubbard Guidance Centre in Dept 12. However, Qual remains the czar of word clearing and retains all case supervision and training of Word Clearing. Note: There is no credit allowed on public Word Clearing. The Qual See must ensure that word clearing always remains in Qual. All staff must be word cleared on all misunderstoods in past subjects (Method 1), then word cleared on their prime post duties and technology (Method 2) and finally Post Purpose Cleared. Word Clearing plays a vital role in the safeguarding of technology and Knowledge and this function must NEVER be allowed to pass out of Qual's hands. The post of Chaplain is needed in an org because there must be someone who can handle neglected public or staff. There must be someone they can turn to. The Chaplain handles persons who are in trouble or who have been neglected and fallen off the right lines. He must handle and get them back on the right lines. 31 The Medical Officer is responsible for the health, proper diagnosis, treatment and fast recovery of any sick staff member, student or preclear, ensuring that Dianetic auditing and Assists are fully utilized to speed recovery. He learns and applies basic first aid and provides the necessary liaison between the Case Supervisor and the Medical Doctor. All in all, Dept 13 is a versatile Department, with very powerful tools to use to bring the org and its staff to a higher and higher operating level and become more and more EFFECTIVE AND WELL TRAINED ORG STAFF MEMBERS. The Qual Sec and Dir Pers Enhancement statistic of Gross Income divided by number on staff is a very accurate index of the progress and effectiveness of all Dept 13 personnel. DEPT 14: DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION AWARENESS LEVEL: CORRECTION Qual is essentially an exporter of Knowledge and Qual has an exciting new addition to its ranks-the Org Library in Dept 14. Under the Staff Librarian, the Org Library ideally contains 2 copies of everything that has ever been issued-books, tapes, policies, technology, packs, manuals on all org machines, various dictionaries of all sizes, in English and other languages, plus speciality books on various subjects which may need to be used in Word Clearing. One set is a Master Copy and has a large red stripe and a red Master Copy, Do Not Remove stamp on it. Master copies are never removed from the library area. The other copies are numbered and may be signed out to staff, as in any library. The Librarian may refuse to sign out books to any staff member who does not promptly return materials or who loses them. There should also be a quiet area in Qual where staff can come and read. We're in the business of Knowledge and Qual is where it's concentrated in the org. The Library is a Technical Information Centre. There is also a Staff Information Officer, who is an expert on where to find what in the Library. Staff may come to the Staff Information Officer for assistance. The Staff Librarian does standard Librarian logging duties and sees that the Org Library is kept in good condition, safeguarded and used. The Org Library must be situated very close to Cramming and the Word Clearers. The Interne Section has an Interneship Supervisor and org Internes get their Okays to Audit in this Section regardless of earlier training, prior to auditing in the Hubbard Guidance Centre. The final OK to Audit is given after an apprenticeship in the HGC by the Case Supervisor, when the Auditor has proven his competence and standard application in a particular level. The Interneship system is the only known way to make course graduates into flubless Auditors. Volume auditing is the keynote of an Interneship. The Interne Supervisor can arrange to have all Field Auditors and Franchise Auditors invited in to get their Okays to Audit in the org. It is a commendable for a field auditor to get an OK to Audit in his nearest org. This will also open the door to getting tech in more in the field, bringing Auditors in for Cramming, etc. The responsibility for the safeguarding of Knowledge and ensuring its full correct use extends beyond the borders of the org and extends throughout the entire org field. Cramming is an essential part of the Interne programme and plays a major role in its ultimate success. It takes many hundreds of hours of actual auditing application, assisted by expert case supervision and instant cramming for the slightest flub or non-standard application to make a real flubless professional Auditor at any level. He also pulls in and crams Course Supervisors and Case Supervisors. The Cramming Officer uses the Library to augment the complete HCO Bulletin packs already in use in Cramming to ensure that Knowledge is known, duplicated and applied. 32 The Cramming Officer uses full study technology, word clearing, the learning drill, training drills and auditing procedure drills to locate "whys" and handle misunderstoods and any inability to apply standard technology. He knows that auditing is not flubless if the student or auditor: (a) Doesn't know the technology - this could be so simple as the person never read the HCO Bulletin. So the Cramming Officer ensures that all new Bulletins are word cleared, star rated, clay demoed by all Supervisors, Auditors and Case Supervisors prior to application. (b) Hasn't drilled on it - this is totally handled by the new drills for each auditing action and handles additionally the problem of "confusion in handling a sequence of motions". All new procedures must also be drilled. (c) Has misunderstoods on it - totally handled by word clearing method 2. Any questions, strange or funny considerations about tech and the Auditor is word cleared on the material. The Cramming Officer has, as his basic task, the finding of lost Knowledge and restoring it to full use. PRODUCT: CORRECT ORG PRODUCTS. VALUABLE FINAL PRODUCT OF THE DIVISION AND THE ORG: EXPORTED KNOWLEDGE. DEPT 15: DEPARTMENT OF VALIDITY AWARENESS LEVEL: VALIDITY The Director of Validity retains the standard Qual functions of Qualifications Interview and Invoice, Examinations, Certifications and Awards and ARC Break Auditor. The validity of the org's valuable final products and products is confirmed in Dept 15. The quality of delivery and the, true attainment of abilities to change conditions is the main vital concern of Dept 15 personnel. Qualifications Interview and Invoice Officer ensures that all persons are smoothly routed in and out of Qual and are correctly invoiced for org services. Qual I and I collects and invoices money for Word Clearing and Cramming. No credit is extended for public Word Clearing. The Student Examiner examines each student on the materials of the course just completed and must ensure that Knowledge and the ability to apply the data is attained. The Preclear Examiner silently examines each preclear and the folder, and verifies that all processes or steps of a rundown have been done, and that the person has attained the full end phenomena before sending to Certs and Awards for Declare? The Preclear Examiner's observations are valuable to the Case Supervisor and he usually becomes one of the most trusted and valued persons in an org. The integrity of Scientology and the hope for beings in this Universe is entrusted to the Examinations Section. The Certifications and Awards Officer provides the final step towards achievement and validation of a Certificate well earned. Certs and Awards logs all achievement carefully and issues Certs and Awards which Scientologists and Dianeticists alike will be proud to display. He must never issue a certificate or award to anyone who has not earned it and must refer all sour or bad indicators on completing persons to the Director of Validity and the Qual Sec for investigation and handling. A good product will always have very good indicators. 33 Certs and Awards also issues Membership Cards and pushes the Scientology Membership programme along heavily. No-one may chit or attack any Qual Staff member who is acting to safeguard technology and knowledge, and preserve the quality of the products and integrity of the organization. The final function in Qual is the ARC Break Auditor. This is an old Qual function and cannot be dropped or shifted. As per the original ARC Break Program, the ARC Break Auditor delivers a free ARC Break session (usually handling ARC Breaks and cleaning up overts) on persons who are ARC Broken with some real or imagined person, in, or formerly in, the org. These persons are then routed to the Registrar for sign-up for their next paid service. The ARC Break Auditor can also be utilized to get in ARC Broken students and preclears and liaises with the ARC Break Registrar in Div 2 to get this done. VALUABLE FINAL PRODUCT OF THE DEPT AND THE ORG: EARNED CER TS AND A WARDS There is one other new function which is recognized and that is: Qual has PR value. Qual staff are opinion leaders in the org. What they say has weight. The Qual See and Qual staff can use propaganda to push standard org actions. For example: "I don't see why the (c) of P doesn't hire more Auditors" or an OOD item, "A meeting was held in Dept 13 and it was agreed that the (c) of P and HAS should hire more Auditors and then we can see the staff gets more auditing," or "Staff should be hatted, or do more study, or get mote auditing," or "There ought to be a special staff Admin Supervisor in Dept I 11." The stats go up and the Qual See says, "Well, that's pretty good, but what about all the paid up undelivered service?" "Deliver, deliver, deliver." "Quality, quality, quality." It is up to Qual to keep these points mentioned. It may not be the right Why but staff remember it. Remember, what Qual personnel say counts-push LRH Knowledge, Policies and orders and the org will catch on. Qual pushes basic actions which should be done. Ron states, "This is the best Qual I've ever seen. This Qual will be so popular, no-one would think of reducing or scanting it. It's hung on the solid anchor of Dept 13-Word Clearing. It will build up org viability." Qual sees that the quality of delivery is great and gets up morale through increasing production, by using Word Clearing, programming and cramming, and thus increasing Knowledge, and keeping Scientology Working. This generates a new higher speed of particle flow-and the germ which starts it all is Qual-the Correction Division. [seal] Judy Ziff Qual Aide for L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:JZ:nt.rd 34 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 DECEMBER 1971 Remimeo Issue IV Qual See Qual Staff Hats CORRECTION DIVISION PURPOSES, IDEAL SCENES, PRODUCTS, STATISTICS (Cancels HCO P/L 22 Sept 70 "Ideal Scenes & Stats", HCO P/L 15 July 70 "Reorganization of the Correction Div" and HCO P/L 8 Aug 70 "Reorganization of the Correction Div" Amendment) PURPOSE OF THE CORRECTION DIVISION To find and restore lost tech and safeguard Knowledge; to ensure the technical honesty and results of Scientology and Dianetics, correct them when needful and attest to them when attained. Person Responsible., Qualifications Secretary D/Qual See for Admin IDEAL SCENE: Fully hatted and manned Qual Division, well organized and drilled in its functions, which provides full word clearing facilities and excellent service to staff, resulting in effective and well trained staff. Top Library service, real Interne training penetrating swift Cramming, resulting in well corrected org products and exported knowledge. Smooth routing of students, staff and pcs, thorough examination and valid certification and classification of all the org's publics. The whole atmosphere in Qual should exude effortless competence, and utilizing the full technology of Dianetics and Scientology, make it known and used correctly. This is keeping Scientology working. Valuable Final Products: A. Effective and well trained staff members. B. Exported Knowledge. C. Earned Certs and Awards. Statistics: A. GI divided by number on staff. B. Money paid for training. C. Total number of creditable success stories turned in, less the number of people not passing Key questions, and less 2 for any Ethics action taken on a student, preclear or staff member for the week. QUAL ESTABLISHMENT OFFICER Purpose: To help LRH to more firmly establish whatever and whoever already exists in the Correction Division. Ideal Scene: Establishes the Division by providing the terminals, lines, spaces and material for the whole Correction Division, so that it can and does correct Auditors, staff, supervisors, C/Ses and students and public effectively, deliver word clearing, programme staff and ensure the technical honesty of the org. Product: Well functioning Qual Div and staff who produce products of their post in quantity, quality and with viability. Statistic: Total number of rising Qual stats for the week. 35 SENIOR OR G CIS Purpose: To help LRH ensure that the results of Scientology are obtained. Ideal Scene: Posted directly under the Qual See, provides a senior C/S spur line from Tech Div, debugs any bogged cases. Sees any and all Red Tag folders daily, is a needed senior terminal to Org C/S in Dept 12. Sees that Tech Div C/Ses and Auditors are fully and adequately crammed for all auditing, C/Sing and programming flubs. Post held by the Qual See when there is no separate Senior C/S on post. Wears Flub Catch report line for lower orgs. Statistic: 1. Total number of Cramming cycles ordered and completed for the week. 2. Total number of cases debugged and now running well. DEPT 13 DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL ENHANCEMENT AWARENESS LEVEL: ENHANCEMENT Person Responsible: Director of Personnel Enhancement Purpose: To ensure that all staff make excellent case and training progress and become true team contributors with increased value to themselves and the Organization. Ideal Scene: Provides top case supervision, seeing that all staff are audited regularly in intensives. Ensures co-ordination and execution of staff training progresses optimumly, through expert personnel programming. Staff Training Officer maintaining and controlling training lines and cycles, full use of word clearing and study technology, thus increasing org efficiency and staff ability. Gives Chaplain and MO assistance to staff and public as needed, ensuring that all persons handled are properly returned to the right lines. It is individual handling all the way to a win in the Dept of Personnel Enhancement. Valuable Final Product: Effective and well trained staff members. Statistic: GI divided by No. on Staff. STAFF CASE SUPERVISOR Purpose: To push all staff cases to the highest possible level, achieving real gains with lots of flubless auditing. Ideal Scene: Expert, thorough case supervision, case programming and handling of each staff case to stable wins and routine progress up the Gradation Chart. Demanding high quality, flubless auditing from all staff staff Auditors and handling all tech departures with cramming and word clearing. Product: Wins of staff pcs and auditors. Statistic: Percentage of F/N at Examiner. STAFF TRAINING OFFICER Purpose: To help LRH train individual staff members and applicants from his own and other orgs in Ethics, Tech and Admin. 36 Ideal Scene: Keeping track of staff, guiding them through their courses, giving them checkouts, expediting their training, seeing that their personnel records in Dept I are factual as to training and assisting them in every way to get training and to be trained rapidly with the end product that orgs have no untrained staff. Product: Trained staff. Statistic: I . Total number of staff study points. 2. Total number of staff completions. PERSONNEL PROGRAMMER Purpose: To help LRH to expertly programme each staff member to a point of real success on his own post, to operate well as a member of the group and attain higher and higher levels of skill, knowledge and ability, through full use of the technology of Scientology and Dianetics. Ideal Scene: Interviews and obtains data from all staff, then programmes them on the meter, in a gradient of wins, to be fully on post, developing its skills and know-how, and channelling staff into higher achievements through full utilization of all study technology. Product: I . Completed staff programmes. 2. The wins of staff members. Statistic: Total number of completed programme steps or cycles. WORD CLEARING SECTION Person responsible: Word Clearing (c) of P Purpose: To help LRH clear away misunderstoods and barriers to learning and ensure that Knowledge is never lost. Ideal Scene: A well organized and line drilled word clearing Section with a minimum of two word clearers, their own word clearing C/S, and Page, handling misunderstoods on past related subjects, current studies or duties and clearing barriers to clear understanding of post purposes, thus ensuring flubless tech and admin quality, soaring org viability and full application of Dianetics and Scientology for the greatest good of the greatest number of dynamics-ultimate survival. Product: Successful staff and students. Statistics: Total number of hours of WD word clearing. Total number of WC completions. CHAPLAIN Purpose: To help LRH to provide succor for the needy and direct them to their next correct step. 37 Ideal Scene: The Chaplain cares for those who have been neglected or fallen off lines, visits the sick, handles civil disputes and wrongs between individual Scientologists and Dianeticists and generally sees that justice is done. The Chaplain also advises the Dir Personnel Enhancement or the Cramming Officer of needed correction cycles on staff. Product: Well handled public or staff personal upsets. Statistic: Number of people routed back on the right line. MEDICAL OFFICER Purpose: To provide good basic medical service, fast handling of any non-optimum physical condition, and bring about the good health of the org staff and its public. Ideal Scene: The MO is well versed in first aid, understands basic body functions and their remedy, liaises with the Medical Doctor for needed tests, correct diagnosis and treatment, never ceases to use Assists and request Dianetic auditing for the sick; keeps the Case Supervisors well informed on all persons on MO lines, never neglects a sick person, and sees that they get the right treatment and get well fast. Product: A healthy staff and public. Statistic: Total number of medical cycles handled. DEPT 14 DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION AWARENESS LEVEL: CORRECTION Person Responsible: Director of Correction Purpose: To help LRH ensure that all Scientology and Dianetics Knowledge is freely available, fully used and promptly corrected when mis-applied, thus ensuring the technical honesty of the organization, Ideal Scene: An org library full of all Scientology and Dianetics materials and tapes, reference books and dictionaries of all kinds, well tabulated and cross-referenced, which is used by the org staff and students. A textbook Interneship in which Auditors become flubless professionals through volume auditing, daily study and practical training. A Cramming finding whys for student and auditor flubs and alertly ensuring that materials are known, cleared of misunderstoods and drilled to confident certainty. Product: Corrected org products. Valuable Final Product: Exported Knowledge. Statistics: I . No. of items studied or used in the org library. 2. Total number of WD hours of auditing by org Internes. 3. Total number of correction actions done in Cramming. STAFF LIBRARIAN Purpose: To help LRH provide a full library of all Scientology and Dianetics Knowledge for org staff reference and use. To safeguard this Knowledge and ensure it never gets lost or removed. 38 Ideal Scene: All Scientology and Dianetics Knowledge and reference materials and dictionaries fully available, indexed and easily found, for org staff use and reference, plus the supply of information on where data is to be found. Sees the materials are correctly stored and safeguarded, with Master Copies clearly marked in Red and never allowed to leave the Library area; also has a library reading area where Knowledge can be studied in the Library. Product: Exported Knowledge. Statistic: Number of items of Knowledge read or studied. INTERNE SUPER VISOR Purpose: To help LRH make real flubless professional Auditors through volume auditing, fast correction of flubs and daily precision training. Ideal Scene: Runs a tight on policy course which concentrates on a fast route to actual volume auditing, knowing that volume auditing with instant correction is the way to make flubless auditors. Puts all Internes and HGC Auditors through the OKay to Audit system and pushes them through to full OKay to Audit on each level. Continually pushes up the standard to higher and higher levels of standardness. Product: Flubless Auditors. Statistic: Total number of well done hours of auditing by all the org's Internes and HGC Auditors who do not have full HGC OKays to Audit on any level. CRAMMING OFFICER Purpose: To help LRH to isolate and correct real causes for staff and student mis-application of technology or policy and see that the correct data is known, cleared of misunderstoods and drilled to confident certainty, thus ensuring the technical honesty of the organization. Ideal Scene: Competently isolates real causes for flubs in policy and tech, ensuring all data in a specific area is studied and that basics are known and applied. Uses word clearing and full study tech and drills to perfect application of all students, auditors and staff. Checks out all auditors and tech staff on all new HCO Bulletins and technical Policy Letters within 24 hours of receipt and drills auditors on any new procedure before issuing an OKay to audit. Checks out auditors and C/Ses on needed cramming cycles. Protects and safeguards knowledges and uses every skill to ensure lost technology is restored and that the integrity and honesty of Scientology and Dianetics are maintained. In a larger org, would have a separate Cramming Officer for tech and admin. Product: Corrected org products. Statistic: Total number of correction actions done in Cramming. DEPT 15 DEPARTMENT OF VALIDITY AWARENESS LEVEL: VALIDITY Person Responsible: Director of Validity 39 Purpose: To help LRH ensure the technical honesty and results of the Organization. Ideal Scene: Fast smooth routing of all publics in and out of Qual, expert pc and student examinations, which pass correctly earned Gradation and Classification and detect and pass for correction all flubbed products. Immediate supply of all earned Certs and Awards, catches any dropped balls, permanently logs all achievements carefully. Fast handling of any ARC broken pcs and routing back onto org lines. Valuable Final Product: Earned Certs and Awards. Statistic: Total number of re-signups for the week. QUAL INTERVIEW AND INVOICE OFFICER Purpose: To help LRH correctly route all publics into, within and out of Qual smoothly and efficiently. Ideal Scene: Logs in and invoices out all paying publics, collects all monies due, reports all non-paying persons as non-handled fast to Dir Validity, logs all staff in and out, invoicing contracted staff at no charge and collecting from non-contracted staff. Product: Well and properly routed publics. Statistic: Total amount of money collected for the week, by reason of Memberships and payment for Qual services. EXAMINER Purpose: To help LRH ensure that the technical results of the Organization are excellent and consistent, that students and preclears are without flaw for their skill or state when passed and that any technical deficiency of org personnel is reported and handled so that the technical results of the organization continue to be excellent and consistent. It must be kept in mind that the product of the organization is not Scientologists, but conditions changed by Scientology. Therefore the ability of the auditor to change conditions in preclears and the ability of the preclear or clear to change conditions along the dynamics are the only concern of the Examiners. The integrity of Scientology and its hope for beings in this Universe are entrusted to the Examiners. PC EXAMINER IDEAL SCENE: Examines all the org's pcs expertly and accurately, catches all flubs, by inspecting all folders sent for Declare? before calling the pc ensuring that the process or rundown was run and full EP attained, and reports all technical deficiencies and ensures these are handled. Product: Earned Certificates and achievements. Statistic: I . Total number of pcs examined. 2. Total number of flubbed products picked up and routed for handling, if accompanied by a Cramming order to the person or persons responsible for the technical flub. 40 STUDENT EXAMINER IDEAL SCENE: Gives thorough written and practical exams which detect all flubbed products and routes these to Cramming, and passes all who know and can apply the data for full Certification or Classification. Product: Students who can and do apply the data learned. Statistic: I . Total number of students examined. 2. Total number of flubbed products picked up and routed to Cramming. CER TS AND AWARDS OFFICER Purpose: To help LRH issue and record valid attestations of skill, state and merit, honestly deserved, attained and earned, by Beings, activities or areas. Ideal Scene: Maintains excellent hard cover log books which list (a) all personal attainments, including the name of the Auditor for each Grade, and (b) category list of all course completions. Prepares handsome certificates the org's publics will be proud to display, in advance and supplies these when attained for Registrar presentation. Observes for any flubbed products and ensures these are corrected. Issues all the org's Certificates and awards, including Membership Cards. Issues preclears and students with data about their next step as a routine action. Valuable Final Product: Earned Certs and Awards. Statistic: I . Total number of certs and awards issued. 2. Total number of flubbed products picked up and reported. ARC BREAK AUDITOR Purpose: To help LRH competently handle any and all ARC broken persons and get these back on lines. Ideal Scene: Liaises with the ARC Break Reg in Div 2 and competently and quickly handles all ARC Broken persons, gets these back on org lines; writes letters, gets FESed folders of ARC broken persons from the Tech Div and gets each handled by locating and indicating the correct by-passed charge. Product: Well handled ARC broken persons, who are no longer ARC broken, and sign up for their next service. Statistic: Total number of ARC broken persons handled who sign up for their next service. Judy Ziff Qual Aide for L. RON HUBBARD LRH:JZ:ne.rd Founder Copyright (c) 1971 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 41 DIV V MINI QUAL ORG BOARD CORRECTION DIVISION 0 0 0 QUAL SEC (c) QUAL SEC for Org Admin VALIDITY CORRECTION DEPARTMENT 13 DEPARTMENT 14 DEPARTMENT 15 0 0 DEPT OF VALIDITY DEPT OF PERSONNEL ENHANCEMENT DEPT OF CORRECTION > VALIDITY DIRECTOR PERSONNEL ENHANCEMENT DIRECTOR CORRECTION DIRECTOR < 0 . Staff C/S (Held by Sec) ORG LIBRARY Staff Training Officer 0 1 QUAL INTERVIEW AND INVOICE Staff Librarian MO > PERSONNEL PROGRAMMING SECTION Staff Information Center t, 0 > Personnel Programmer Policy Tech EXAMINER CLEARING SECTION Tapes Packs 2 Word Clearing Auditors Purpose Clearing Auditors Qual Clearing Page C-~ * Intern Supervisor/ Cramming Officer Chaplain Medical Officer I Posts must be manned. HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 FEBRUARY 1965 REISSUED 15 JUNE 1970 Remimeo Sthil Students (Reissued 28.1.73 to correct word on p. 47, Assn/Org See Hat Para 2. [Change in this type style-D HCO Sec Hat Case Sup Hat Ds of P Hat Ds of T Hat Staff Member Hat Franchise (issued May 1965) Note: Neglect of this Pol Ltr has caused great hardship on staffs, has cost countless millions and made it necessary in 1970 to engage in an all out International effort to restore basic Scientology over the world. Within 5 years after the issue of this PL with me off the lines, violation had almost destroyed orgs. "Quickie grades" entered in and denied gain to tens of thousands of cases. Therefore actions which neglect or violate this Policy Letter are HIGH CRIMES resulting in Comm Evs on ADMINISTRATORS and EXECUTIVES. It is not "entirely a tech matter" as its neglect destroys orgs and caused a 2 year slump. IT IS THE BUSINESS OF EVERY STAFF MEMBER to enforce it. ALL LEVELS KEEPING SCIENTOLOGY WORKING HCO See or Communicator Hat Check on all personnel and new personnel as taken on. We have some time since passed the point of achieving uniformly workable technology. The only thing now is getting the technology applied. If you can't get the technology applied then you can't deliver what's promised. It's as simple as that. If you can get the technology applied, you can deliver what's promised. The only thing you can be upbraided for by students or pcs is "no results". Trouble spots occur only where there are "no results". Attacks from governments or monopolies occur only where there are "no results" or "bad results". Therefore the road before Scientology is clear and its ultimate success is assured if the technology is applied. So it is the task of the Assn or Org See, the HCO See, the Case Supervisor, the (c) of P, the (c) of T and all staff members to get the correct technology applied. Getting the correct technology applied consists of: One: Having the correct technology. Two: Knowing the technology. Three: Knowing it is correct. Four: Teaching correctly the correct technology. Five: Applying the technology. Six: Seeing that the technology is correctly applied. Seven: Hammering out of existence incorrect technology. Eight: Knocking out incorrect applications. 43 Nine: Closing the door on any possibility of incorrect technology. Ten: Closing the door on incorrect application. One above has been done. Two has been achieved by many. Three is achieved by the individual applying the correct technology in a proper manner and observing that it works that way. Four is being done daily successfully in most parts of the world. Five is consistently accomplished daily. Six is achieved by instructors and supervisors consistently, Seven is done by a few but is a weak point. Eight is not worked on hard enough. Nine is impeded by the "reasonable" attitude of the not quite bright. Ten is seldom done with enough ferocity. Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten are the only places Scientology can bog down in any area. The reasons for this are not hard to find. (a) A weak certainty that it works in Three above can lead to weakness in Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. (b) Further, the not-too-bright have a bad point on the button Self-Importance. (c) The lower the IQ, the more the individual is shut off from the fruits of observation. (c) The service facs of people make them defend themselves against anything they confront good or bad and seek to make it wrong. (e) The bank seeks to knock out the good and perpetuate the bad. Thus, we as Scientologists and as an organization must be very alert to Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. In all the years I have been engaged in research I have kept my comm lines wide open for research data. I once had the idea that a group could evolve truth. A third of a Century has thoroughly disabused me of that idea. Willing as I was to accept suggestions and data, only a handful of suggestions (less than twenty) had long run value and none were major or basic; and when I did accept major or basic suggestions and used them, we went astray and I repented and eventually had to "eat crow". On the other hand there have been thousands and thousands of suggestions and writings which, if accepted and acted upon, would have resulted in the complete destruction of all our work as well as the sanity of pcs. So I know what a group of people will do and how insane they will go in accepting unworkable "technology". By actual record the percentages are about twenty to 100,000 that a group of human beings will dream up bad technology to destroy good technology. As we could have gotten along without suggestions, then, we had better steel ourselves to continue to do so now that we have made it. This point will, of course, be attacked as "unpopular", "egotistical" and "undemocratic". It very well may be. But it is also a survival point. And I don't see that popular measures, self-abnegation and democracy have done anything for Man but push him further into the mud. Currently, popularity endorses degraded novels, self-abnegation has filled the South East Asian jungles with stone idols and corpses, and democracy has given us inflation and income tax. Our technology has not been discovered by a group. True, if the group had not supported me in many ways I could not have discovered it either. But it remains that if in its formative stages it was not discovered by a group, then group efforts, one can safely assume, will not add to it or successfully alter it in the future. I can only say this now that it is done. There remains, of course, group tabulation or co-ordination of what has been done, which will be valuable-only so long as it does not seek to alter basic principles and successful applications. The contributions that were worth while in this period of forming the technology were help in the form of friendship, of defence, of organization, of dissemination, of application, of advices on results and of finance. These were great contributions and 44 were, and are, appreciated. Many thousands contributed in this way and made us what we are. Discovery contribution was not however part of the broad picture. We will not speculate here on why this was so or how I came to rise above the bank. We are dealing only in facts and the above is a fact-the group left to its own devices would not have evolved Scientology but with wild dramatization of the bank called "new ideas" would have wiped it out. Supporting this is the fact that Man has never before evolved workable mental technology and emphasizing it is the vicious technology he did evolve-psychiatry, psychology, surgery, shock treatment, whips, duress, punishment, etc, ad infinitum. So realize that we have climbed out of the mud by whatever good luck and good sense, and refuse to sink back into it again. See that Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten above are ruthlessly followed and we will never be stopped. Relax them, get reasonable about it and we will perish. So far, while keeping myself in complete communication with all suggestions, I have not failed on Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten in areas I could supervise closely. But it's not good enough for just myself and a few others to work at this. Whenever this control as per Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten has been relaxed the whole organizational area has failed. Witness Elizabeth, N.J., Wichita, the early organizations and groups. They crashed only because I no longer did Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. Then, when they were all messed up, you saw the obvious "reasons" for failure. But ahead of that they ceased to deliver and that involved them in other reasons. The common denominator of a group is the reactive bank. Thetans without banks have different responses. They only have their banks in common. They agree then only on bank principles. Person to person the bank is identical. So constructive ideas are individual and seldom get broad agreement in a human group. An individual must rise above an avid craving for agreement from a humanoid group to get anything decent done. The bank-agreement has been what has made Earth a Hell-and if you were looking for Hell and found Earth, it would certainly serve. War, famine, agony and disease has been the lot of Man. Right now the great governments of Earth have developed the means of frying every Man, Woman and Child on the planet. That is Bank. That is the result of Collective Thought Agreement. The decent, pleasant things on this planet come from individual actions and ideas that have somehow gotten by the Group Idea. For that matter, look how we ourselves are attacked by "public opinion" media. Yet there is no more ethical group on this planet than ourselves. Thus each one of us can rise above the domination of the bank and then, as a group of freed beings, achieve freedom and reason. It is only the aberrated group, the mob, that is destructive. When you don't do Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten actively, you are working for the Bank dominated mob. For it will surely, surely (a) introduce incorrect technology and swear by it, (b) apply technology as incorrectly as possible, (c) open the door to any destructive idea, and (c) encourage incorrect application. It's the Bank that says the group is all and the individual nothing. It's the Bank that says we must fail. So just don't play that game. Do Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten and you will knock out of your road all the future thorns. Here's an actual example in which a senior executive had to interfere because of a pc spin: A Case Supervisor told Instructor A to have Auditor B run Process X on Preclear C. Auditor B afterwards told Instructor A that "it-didn't work". Instructor A was weak on Three above and didn't really believe in Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. So Instructor A told the Case Supervisor "Process X didn't work on Preclear C". Now this strikes directly at each of One to Six above in Preclear C, Auditor B, Instructor A and the Case Supervisor. It opens the door to the introduction of "new technology" and to failure. What happened here? Instructor A didn't jump down Auditor B's throat, that's all that happened. This is what he should have done: Grabbed the Auditor's report and looked it over. When a higher executive on this case did so she found what the Case Supervisor and the rest missed: that Process X increased Preclear C's TA to 25 TA divisions for the session but that near session end Auditor B Qed and Aed with a 45 cognition and abandoned Process X while it still gave high TA and went off running one of Auditor B's own manufacture, which nearly spun Preclear C. Auditor B's IQ on examination turned out to be about 75. Instructor A was found to have huge ideas of how you must never invalidate anyone, even a lunatic. The Case Supervisor was found to be "too busy with admin to have any time for actual cases". All right, there's an all too typical example. The Instructor should have done Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. This would have begun this way. Auditor B: "That process X didn't work." Instructor A: "What exactly did you do wrong?" Instant attack. "Where's your auditor's report for the session? Good. Look here, you were getting a lot of TA when you stopped Process X. What did you do?" Then the Pc wouldn't have come close to a spin and all four of these would have retained certainty. In a year, I had four instances in one small group where the correct process recommended was reported not to have worked. But on review found that each one had (a) increased the TA, (b) had been abandoned, and (c) had been falsely reported as unworkable. Also, despite this abuse, in each of these four cases the recommended, correct process cracked the case. Yet they were reported as not having worked! Similar examples exist in instruction and these are all the more deadly as every time instruction in correct technology is flubbed, then the resulting error, uncorrected in the auditor, is perpetuated on every pc that auditor audits thereafter. So Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten are even more important in a course than in supervision of cases. Here's an example: A rave recommendation is given a graduating student "because he gets more TA on pcs than any other student on the course!" Figures of 435 TA divisions a session are reported. "Of course his model session is poor but it's just a knack he has" is also included in the recommendation. A careful review is undertaken because nobody at levels 0 to IV is going to get that much TA on pcs. It is found that this student was never taught to read an EMeter TA dial! And no instructor observed his handling of a meter and it was not discovered that he "overcompensated" nervously, swinging the TA 2 or 3 divisions beyond where it needed to go to place the needle at "set". So everyone was about to throw away standard processes and model session because this one student "got such remarkable TA". They only read the reports and listened to the brags and never looked at this student. The pcs in actual fact were making slightly less than average gain, impeded by a rough model session and misworded processes. Thus, what was making the pcs win (actual Scientology) was hidden under a lot of departures and errors. I recall one student who was squirreling on an Academy course and running a lot of off-beat whole track on other students after course hours. The academy students were in a state of electrification on all these new experiences and weren't quickly brought under control and the student himself never was given the works on Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten so they stuck. Subsequently, this student prevented another squirrel from being straightened out and his wife died of cancer resulting from physical abuse. A hard, tough instructor at that moment could have salvaged two squirrels and saved the life of a girl. But no, students had a right to do whatever they pleased. Squirreling (going off into weird practices or altering Scientology) only comes about from noncomprehension. Usually the non-comprehension is not of Scientology but some earlier contact with an off-beat humanoid practice which in its turn was not understood. When people can't get results from what they think is standard practice, they can be counted upon to squirrel to some degree. The most trouble in the past two years came from orgs where an executive in each could not assimilate straight Scientology. Under instruction in Scientology they were unable to define terms or demonstrate examples of principles. And the orgs where they were got into plenty of trouble. And worse, it could not be straightened out easily because neither one of these people could or would duplicate instructions. Hence, a debacle resulted in two places, directly traced to failures of instruction earlier. So proper instruction is vital. The (c) of T and his Instructors and all Scientology Instructors must be merciless in getting Four, Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten into effective action. That one student, dumb and impossible though he may seem and of no use to anyone, may yet some day be the cause of untold upset because nobody was interested enough to make sure Scientology got home to him. With what we know now, there is no student we enrol who cannot be properly trained. As an instructor, one should be very alert to slow progress and should turn the 46 sluggards inside out personally. No system will do it, only you or me with our sleeves rolled up can crack the back of bad studenting and we can only do it on an individual student, never on a whole class only. He's slow = something is awful wrong. Take fast action to correct it. Don't wait until next week. By then he's got other messes stuck to him. If you can't graduate them with their good sense appealed to and wisdom shining, graduate them in such a state of shock they'll have nightmares if they contemplate squirreling. Then experience will gradually bring about Three in them and they'll know better than to chase butterflies when they should be auditing. When somebody enrols, consider he or she has joined up for the duration of the universe-never permit an "open-minded" approach. If they're going to quit let them quit fast. If they enrolled, they're aboard, and if they're aboard, they're here on the same terms as the rest of us-win or die in the attempt. Never let them be half-mirlded. about being Scientologists. The finest organizations in history have been tough, dedicated organizations. Not one namby-pamby bunch of panty-waist dilettantes have ever made anything. It's a tough universe. The social veneer makes it seem mild. But only the tigers survive-and even they have a hard time. We'll survive because we are tough and are dedicated. When we do instruct somebody properly he becomes more and more tiger. When we instruct half-mindedly and are afraid to offend, soared to enforce, we don't make students into good Scientologists and that lets everybody down. When Mrs. Pattycake comes to us to be taught, turn that wandering doubt in her eye into a fixed, dedicated glare and she'll win and we'll all win. Humour her and we all die a little. The proper instruction attitude is, "You're here so you're a Scientologist. Now we're going to make you into an expert auditor no matter what happens. We'd rather have you dead than incapable. " Fit that into the economics of the situation and lack of adequate time and you see the cross we have to bear. But we won't have to bear it forever. The bigger we get the more economics and time we will have to do our job. And the only things which can prevent us from getting that big fast are areas in from One to Ten. Keep those in mind and we'll be able to grow. Fast. And as we grow our shackles will be less and less. Failing to keep One to Ten, will make us grow less. So the ogre which might eat us up is not the government or the High Priests. It's our possible failure to retain and practise our technology. An Instructor or Supervisor or Executive must challenge with ferocity instances of "unworkability". They must uncover what did happen, what was run and what was done or not done. If you have One and Two, you can only acquire Three for all by making sure of all the rest. We're not playing some minor game in Scientology. It isn't cute or something to do for lack of something better. The whole agonized future of this planet, every Man, Woman and Child on it, and your own destiny for the next endless trillions of years depend on what you do here and now with and in Scientology. This is a deadly serious activity. And if we miss getting out of the trap now, we may never again have another chance. Remember, this is our first chance to do so in all the endless trillions of years of the past. Don't muff it now because it seems unpleasant or unsocial to do Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. Do them and we'll win. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:jw.rr.nt.ka.mes.rd Copyright (c) 1965, 1970, 1973 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 47 I HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 14 FEBRUARY 1965 (Reissued on 7 June 1967, with the word Remimeo "instructor" replaced by "supervisor") All Hats BPI SAFEGUARDING TECHNOLOGY For some years we have had a word "squirrelling". It means altering Scientology, off-beat practices. It is a bad thing. I have found a way to explain why. Scientology is a workable system. This does not mean it is the best possible system or a perfect system. Remember and use that definition. Scientology is a workable system. In fifty thousand years of history on this planet alone, Man never evolved a workable system. It is doubtful if, in foreseeable history, he will ever evolve another. Man is caught in a huge and complex labyrinth. To get out of it requires that he follow the closely taped path of Scientology. Scientology will take him out of the labyrinth. But only if he follows the exact markings in the tunnels. It has taken me a third of a century in this lifetime to tape this route out. It has been proven that efforts by Man to find different routes came to nothing. It is also a clear fact that the route called Scientology does lead out of the labyrinth. Therefore it is a workable system, a route that can be travelled. What would you think of a guide who, because his party said it was dark and the road rough and who said another tunnel looked better, abandoned the route he knew would lead out and led his party to a lost nowhere in the dark. You'd think he was a pretty wishy-washy guide. What would you think of a supervisor who let a student depart from procedure the supervisor knew worked. You'd think he was a pretty wishy-washy supervisor. What would happen in a labyrinth if the guide let some girl stop in a pretty canyon and left her there forever to contemplate the rocks? You'd think he was a pretty heartless guide. You'd expect him to say at least, "Miss, those rocks may be pretty, but the road out doesn't go that way." All right, how about an auditor who abandons the procedure which will make his preclear eventually clear just because the preclear had a cognition? People have following the route mixed up with "the right to have their own ideas". Anyone is certainly entitled to have opinions and ideas and cognitions-so long as these do not bar the route out for self and others. Scientology is a workable system. It white tapes the road out of the labyrinth. If there were no white tapes marking the right tunnels, Man would just go on wandering around and around the way he has for eons, darting off on wrong roads, going in circles, ending up in the sticky dark, alone. Scientology, exactly and correctly followed, takes the person up and out of the mess. So when you see somebody having a ball getting everyone to take peyote because it restimulates prenatals, know he is pulling people off the route. Realize he is squirrelling. He isn't following the route. Scientology is a new thing-it is a road out. There has not been one. Not all the salesmanship- in the world can make a bad route a proper route. And an awful lot of bad routes are being sold. Their end product is further slavery, more darkness, more misery. 48 Scientology is the only workable system Man has. It has already taken people toward higher IQ, better lives and all that. No other system has. So realize that it has no competitor. Scientology is a workable system. It has the route taped. The search is done. Now the route only needs to be walked. So put the feet of students and preclears on that route. Don't let them off of it no matter how fascinating the side roads seem to them. And move them on up and out. Squirrelling is today destructive of a workable system. Don't let your party down. By whatever means, keep them on the route. And they'll be free. If you don't, they won't. LRH:jw.jp.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright (c) 1965, 1967 Founder by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 31 MAY 1968 (Reissued from Flag Order 900) Remimeo SCIENTOLOGY TECHNOLOGY There is one Tech and that is Standard Tech. Unfortunately there is other Tech around. This other Tech is a Liability. Other Tech is defined as any tech which is not standard Tech. Let's start punching this hard. LRH:sb.js.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright(c) 1968 Founder by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 21 NOVEMBER 1968 Remimeo SENIOR POLICY We always deliver what we promise. LRH:ei.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright (c) 1968 founder by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 49 NOT HCO POLICY LETTER CORRECT COLOUR FLASH RED ON WHITE HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 20 MAY 1969 Remimeo Dian Checksheet KEEPING DIANETICS WORKING IN AN AREA In that any Dianetics Course, starting out, has only its Course Supervisor trained, the problems of what is used for Case Supervision and Cramming Supervisor in Qual will arise. Here more than any other points, alteration can enter. Altering, doing something else, is a sufficiently serious problem to destroy a Course and all the benefits of Dianetics in a whole area. Early on, during the development of the Standard Dianetics Course, we were suddenly getting case failures. These were traced by Case Supervision to wild variations from Standard Dianetic procedure. These variations were traced to an examiner who during student checkouts was giving "advice". As soon as this was handled, case gains immediately resumed. Over the many years of Dianetic use, I think we must have seen all possible variations of auditing. "New" phenomena were often discovered and used and 0 eventually the whole subject wandered off into never-never land and ceased to produce uniform results. What has happened here in Standard Dianetics is that the exact actions that produce results on all cases have been isolated and used as THE procedure. The procedure is a thin narrow walk way through a huge field of potential alterations. THERE ARE NO DIFFERENT CASES. Built in to the Standard Dianetic procedure are the remedies. For instance early Dianetics was plagued by several problems: I . Lack of visio-an inability to see pictures. This was solved by getting date and duration. 2. Perception shut off. Not required in total now to produce results. Sonic, ability to hear the sound in pictures, is not needed at all. Impression is sufficient. 3. Somatic shut off. Not now required to be solved but its source (drugs and alcohol) have been discovered. 4. Rough sessions. Solved by TRs. 5. Lack of auditor judgement in diagnosis. Solved by the E-Meter. In these years of research I have been able to wrap up these and other things. There have been more cases run on Dianetics than could easily be counted. So the research data is very broad. This is no new subject. It has been close to 39 years under research. Thus what you are told on the Standard Dianetics Course is the essence of all this 50 work and experience. There are no unsolved problems, there is only varied application where there should not be. The whole object of the course is to train people to get good RESULTS, and train people to give a course that results in GOOD AUDITORS. That's the whole thing. We could also teach over 50,000,000 words about things that don't get results or train auditors. The essence of a brilliant subject is a simple subject. Therefore anything that varies the data of a Standard Dianetics Course can send it out into unworkability. I've seen auditors also use "peyote" (a drug), C02 and drugs "t o help auditing". I've seen many different meter types used. I've looked over a thousand different ways to run a session. And I've seen all these things fail. The four points of greatest potential failure are I . A Course Supervisor who interprets data and alters it in order to satisfy some student's offbeat quest. 2. An Examiner who throws curves into data by means of invalidating the right data. 3. A Case Supervisor who does not simply and only put the auditor back onto the main line and who seeks to "solve" cases by altering data. 4. An Auditor who, not knowing his data in the first place, alters the data and, because in an altered form he fails, starts off on a wilder alteration of data and fails harder. Under Supervisor comes the course and cramming supervisor both. So you see, that to get real Standard Dianetic results going in an area you have to be very alert to hold the exact data line as contained in the HCOBs. Where you begin to find case failures, look to I to 4 above and to student failure to just simply study and drill. For the first time you have an exact subject in the field of the "humanities". These "humanities" for all man's history have been a mass of superstition, bad logic, propaganda, authority and brutality. An exact humanity is so new that it has a bit of a hard time. All the errors and prejudices start to "blow off" when truth enters in. Just be sure you don't lose the subject with the confusion. Cope, make do, hold the line and you'll have a successful Dianetic area. It's worth working toward, worth achieving. You have only one big stable datum. IF IT ISN'T WORKING IT IS BEING VARIED. To get it working again, find who and what is varying it and get back on the main line. LRH:an.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright (c) 1969 Founder by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 51 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 30 MAY 1970 Remimeo L44PORTANT CUTATIVES In the period up to 1966 we were plagued by an occasional obsessiveness to ADD to any process or policy. Additives made things unworkable. After 1966 when I left the post of Executive Director WW, a new condition set hi. Checksheets, processes, intensives, grades began to be CUT DOWN. This we can dub a CUTATIVE impulse to coin a word. So persuasive were its advocates that even I was persuaded to agree to some points of it so you need not feel bad if you were gulled into buying the idea of shortening things in order to produce a quicker result. No one really saw where the trend was going. In 1970 a survey I have just completed has shown that this effort was so complete that the following had been broadly accomplished: A. Training no longer included enough Scientology materials to make an effective Scientology auditor in many places. B. Grades had been shortened from 50 hours 0 to IV to 2 1/2 minutes. C. The End Phenomena of grades and processes were discarded. The end result has been: I . Few skilled auditors. 2. Shrunken and struggling Scn orgs. 3. A field that is disappointed in results-for they think they have had grades and haven't. 4. People coming into Advanced Orgs to be cleared who have NO lower grades actually run and so they can't make any upper grades. In effect Scientology was thrown away. From total workability it was cut down to occasional result. I saw the first impulse of this in an executive long since dismissed from Saint Hill as a constant overt no-case gain case who agitated constantly to remove tapes from the Saint Hill Course. As 90% of the data on the SHSBC is on tape I merely thought he had gone over to the enemy and ignored him. Some others, however, had the same idea and started labeling basic books and bulletins "Mere Background Data" or saying "We don't use that now" or "That's old and you only look at it for interest". Thus the laws of listing and other phenomena were thrown away. Recently I found the reason Case Supervisors failed is that they just don't know "The Original Thesis" and "Evolution of a Science" or "Scn 8-80" or "Scn 8-8008". WHEN I DEMANDED THEY STUDY THESE BOOKS THEY BECAME CAPABLE OF HANDLING CASES. They did not know what they were handling-the mind-and so 52 how could they be sensible in ordering what was to be run on a case? Back in 1950 we used to have a small bunch of goony birds, ex-psychologists, ex-lunatics. They were constantly demanding a 2 second action that totally cleared someone. Behind this was an inability to concentrate attention or even to work. These were people striving for total effect instantly. Yet they couldn't run with reality on any process heavier than "How are you?" and they never saw a wall-they saw a mock up of it! So the impulse of DO IT ALL NOW NOW that destroyed any sanity of psychiatry is always around. A student with a one item checksheet who does it in one minute is the ideal course to such. A preclear run for 21/2 minutes to total top grades becomes an ideal auditing session to such. Such things just aren't real. And such unreality got into the lines too hard and is being escorted right back out right now. The following policies are in full force and are to be backed up fully. 1. Course checksheets may not be cut, edited or reduced after a fully approved checksheet is issued for use on any course. 2. No grade may be awarded for which all processes of that grade have not been run and where the end phenomena of that grade is not attested to singly and fully by the preclear before an examiner. 3. Anyone found relegating basic materials to unimportance, by reason of age or volume is to lose his post and certificates. 4. Any statistic claimed which is achieved by downgrading materials or grades or falsely pretending an end phenomena has been achieved for pcs, or skill by auditors shall result in the dismissal of the division head presenting it. 5. No suppressive person with a fat ethics file and no case gain may hold any executive position in a Scientology org. If you in any org or franchise are having any field or financial trouble you need not look further than errors pointed out in this Policy Letter. "Dianetic Triples" awarded after 11/2 hours of processing, "multiple declares" after 10 minutes from 0 to IV, using checksheets from which all basic material has been cut, the failure to realize gains and abilities and success have to be worked for to be true, are at the bottom of any trouble any org or franchise is having. Beginning with the Pol Ltr of 10 May 1970 a more honest era has began. Scramble around and put it right. Deliver Scientology not a Cutative. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:dz.nt.ka.aap Copyright (c) 1970 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 53 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 17 JUNE 1970 Remimeo Applies to all URGENT AND SHs and Academies L44PORTANT HGCs Franchises TECHNICAL DEGRADES (This PL and HCO PL Feb 7,1965 must be made part of every study pack as the first items and must be listed on checksheets.) Any checksheet in use or in stock which carries on it any degrading statement must be destroyed and issued without qualifying statements. Example: Level 0 to IV Checksheets SH carry "A. Background Material-This section is included as an historical background, but has much interest and value to the student. Most of the processes are no longer used, having been replaced by more modern technology. The student is only required to read this material and ensure he leaves no misunderstood." This heading covers such vital things as TRs, Op Pro by Dup! The statement is a falsehood. These checksheets were not approved by myself, all the material of the Academy and SH courses IS in use. Such actions as this gave us "Quickie Grades", ARC Broke the field and downgraded the Academy and SH Courses. A condition of TREASON or cancellation of certificates or dismissal and a full investigation of the background of any person found guilty, will be activated in the case of anyone committing the following HIGH CRIMES. I . Abbreviating an official Course in Dianetics and Scientology so as to lose the full theory processes and effectiveness of the subjects. 2. Adding comments to checksheets or instructions labelling any material "background" or "not used now" or "old" or any similar action which will result in the student not knowing, using, and applying the data in which he is being trained. 3. Employing after I Sept 1970 any checksheet for any course not authorized by myself and the SO Organizing Bureau Flag. 4. Failing to strike from any checksheet remaining in use meanwhile any such comments as "historical", "background", "not used", "old", etc. or VERBALLY STATING IT TO STUDENTS. 5. Permitting a pc to attest to more than one grade at a time on the pc's own determinism without hint or evaluation. 6. Running only one process for a grade between 0 to IV. 7. Failing to use all processes for a level. 8. Boasting as to speed of delivery in a session, such as "I put in Grade Zero in 3 minutes." Etc. 54 9. Shortening time of application of auditing for financial or labor saving considerations. 10. Acting in any way calculated to lose the technology of Dianetics and Scientology to use or impede its use or shorten its materials or its application. REASON: The effort to get students through courses and get pcs, processed in orgs was considered best handled by reducing materials or deleting processes from grades. The pressure exerted to speed up student completions and auditing completions was mistakenly answered by just not delivering. The correct way to speed up a student's progress is by using 2 way comm and applying the study materials to students. The best way to really handle pcs is to ensure they make each level fully before going on to the next and repairing them when they do not. The puzzle of the decline of the entire Scientology network in the late 60S is entirely answered by the actions taken to shorten time in study and in processing by deleting materials and actions. Reinstituting full use and delivery of Dianetics and Scientology is the answer to any recovery. The product of an org is well taught students and thoroughly audited pcs. When the product vanishes, so does the org. The orgs; must survive for the sake of this planet. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd Copyright (c) 1970 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 55 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO, POLICY LETTER OF 26 OCTOBER 1971 Remimeo (c) of P Hat Tech Sec Hat Qual Sec Hat Registrar Hat TECH DOWNGRADES A constant alertness must be maintained in the Tech and Qual Divisions and especially by a C/S and (c) of P for technical downgrades. To people who have no personal reality on the results of processing it is especially easy to be "reasonable" about no results. The public is not result conscious. This is proven by a century of botched up psychiatry and psychology. At no time in that century has a government or a society recognized or demanded results. The evidence that this is a fact is very plain. Psychiatry and psychology have never achieved a positive lasting result of any benefit but on the contrary downgrade, injure and kill. Yet they are still functioning as professions. Now this seems to be an invitation or justification for an org not to try for any results. But the truth is that the public is with you just so long as results are achieved. As soon as they aren't achieved, areas become upset. And as for psychiatry and psychology, they are functioning but resultless, are in serious trouble and are despised. So there is no tradition of or any general belief in results in the society or its governments. Thus an org can become sloppy as there is no visible demand for results. There is only an invisible hope. And a definite reaction when they don't occur. We CAN and DO achieve results beyond anyone's hopes. So long as we continue to do this our area control will expand. When we don't it will contract. In view of the above lack of demand, it is up to us to hold up our own standards. Quality is a matter we must give constant attention. We must produce: I . Students who CAN audit. 2. Pcs who HAVE ACHIEVED gains in auditing. A very high-handed attitude, based on truth, is what is required of us. Example: Pc has had triple grades but can't talk. All right, so we don't let him go. We say, "We're sorry but you must redo your grade zero." We get a Folder Error Summary, repair it, really set him up, get him through a Comm Course and redo zero with further processes. Example: The OCA graph of a pc "completing" his Dianetics is all below the line-unacceptable. We don't kid ourselves, pay a completion bonus to the auditor and let the pc go. 56 We say, "Sorry. You haven't made it. This takes more auditing." Example: A student "graduates" from the Academy yet doesn't audit. We call him back, find out why, word clear him, drill him, demand he interne. AS LONG AS A STUDENT OR PC THINKS HIS FAILURE TO MAKE IT IS ALL RIGHT WITH YOU, YOU WILL HAVE A BAD REPUTE IN HIS AREA. PRIVATELY HE WILL THINK THE SUBJECT DOESN'T WORK AND THAT YOU ARE FRAUDS. The moment you say to somebody who hasn't made it, "You have not met our standards" truth and respect go in. Reversely, the moment you say to somebody who has made it that he has, the truth of your skill is apparent to him. To tell people that haven't made it that they have is to establish a lie and earn contempt. To tell people they haven't made it WHEN THEY HAVE is to get back hostility and a bad repute. THE GRADE CHART When the pc has honestly achieved the auditing skills or pc grades of the Gradation Chart you are satisfied. If the pc hasn't, you are not satisfied. This technical honesty is your winning card. Even if he buys no more training or auditing he will respect you and have confidence in you. LOTS OF AUDITING Real gains for pcs are attained with lots of auditing closely spaced as in intensives. Failure to receive enough auditing is the primary reason for case failures. LOTS OF COACHING The real gains of a student come from lots of coaching, lots of tough unswerving demands that he know his business. CONCLUSION You don't just sit back and say "We did all we could so we'll let it go." You deal in truth. Students or pcs, make it or they don't. Whichever way it is, you say so. You demand they do make it. Never permit a downgrade of a training or processing result. Even if the person buys no more auditing you still tell him. Get off the dishonest false Public Relations morals of this planet. Just be honest about results. You will be startled how well it works and how right it is. LRH:sb.rd Copyright (c) 1971 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard Founder ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 57 NOT HCO POLICY LETTER CORRECT COLOUR FLASH RED ON WHITE HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 6 AUGUST AD 15 Remimeo All Qual Hats All Staff Auditor Hats Tech Executives Ethics HCO See Div 7 QUALIFICATIONS TECHNICAL ACTIONS THIS IS A STAR RATED TECHNICAL HAT FOR EXAMINERS, REVIEW AUDITORS AND QUAL EXECUTIVES AND IS THE STANDARD GUIDE FOR THEIR TECHNICAL ACTIONS All cases that come to the Qual Division are unusual. The solution to ALL cases that come to the Qual Division is to do the USUAL. If you don't hold on to that datum hard, all the "unusual" cases will soon have Review doing the unusual. And the only salvation for any Qual situation is to do the USUAL. Don't go into a dispersal because of the unusual nature of the Review cases. If they were standard they would not be in Review. But Review has a standard procedure. It is an Always, invariable standard procedure. Don't audit the case, audit the procedure. If you do so YOU WILL NEVER MISS. You will only miss if you get wrapped up in how unusual it all is. Today Case Supervision and Review actions are all very, very standard. And very, very workable. You only get in a mess with a case when you don't use standard actions. It took more than a third of a century to find the keys to all cases. None is going to repeat all that research in the 20 minutes given to handle a case, so the best solution is to do what's known. FORMER RELEASE CHECK When someone buys a Former Release Rehabilitation, he first goes to Review to get a check. This must be a perfunctory check. If you audit the pc you may float a needle on the check. The Review auditor merely puts the pc who wants a Former Release check on a meter and asks: "Have you been Released earlier?" If it reads, THAT'S the end of the check. One says "Yes you evidently were," and adds, "Go to the Registrar and get a Former Release Rehabilitation." If it doesn't read it doesn't mean, not Former Release. THE PC MAY BE ARC BROKEN, and the meter of an ARC Broken pc may not read for the auditor. In fact an inexperienced auditor sometimes calls an ARC Broken needle a "floating needle" merely because it doesn't react to the auditor. So if the meter doesn't react on the question of was the pc a Former Release, all you do in Review is say "There may be ARC Breaks around Former Release. It therefore doesn't read right now. It may read if the ARC Breaks are picked up," and sends the pc to the Registrar for Rehabilitation just the same. In short two things can happen in a Former Release check. It reads. It doesn't read. In both cases send the pc to the Registrar for a Former Release Rehabilitation. So that action is real simple. What the pc says and does has nothing to do with it. Say what you have to to get the pc to the Registrar, but encourage no Itsa or you'll be tied up for an hour or two, working for nothing. If the pc has already been to the Registrar and bought a Former Release Rehabilitation then after the above check send the pc to the HGC Admin. That's all there is to it. You do anything else and you'll goof up everything. Start to audit the pc, invite the pc to Itsa, start picking up times or ARC Breaks and you've had it. You'll be wearing the HGC hat and costing the org money and slowing your own lines. 58 Believe me, do just the above and NO MORE on a "Former Release Check" in Review. Don't get all wound up in the guy's case. They're ALL different and unusual. That's no reason why a Former Release Check should be unusual. Get it? CASE SUPERVISOR CHECK When the Case Supervisor sends a pc already in the HGC to Review there is only ONE standard action: Form 26 June 1965 is done like an assessment, fast, no excessive Itsa. Further, it's done NOW. The Case Supervisor wants it right away. NEVER have a "backlog" of Reviews on Case Supervisor request for Review. Pc comes in, gets the Form done BANG. Right now. Takes 10-15 minutes. No more than that. One puts down under recommendations what has been found on the assessment. "Pick up Cleaned Cleans" or "Auditor's Comm Cycle out, do ARC Break List I Auditing by List." Whatever you found you recommend it be done. Former Release gave a big read and BD. All right, put "Do Former Release Rehab," as the recommendation. When the Case Supervisor asks for a Review of the case one ONLY does the form and does it only as an assessment. One does not handle any part of that form on a Case Supervisor request. And one does it straightaway. A Review "Backlog" is a disgrace. One day wait is too many. It's done at once. Why? Because it only takes a few minutes. Do the form, send the pc to the Examiner and the Examiner returns the pc a t once to the HGC or at once sends to Ethics if a Roller Coaster is found or no case change. Honest, it's too easy. If it takes anyone longer than that then it's because an assessment isn't being done. The form is being used for auditing! When all that's needed is an assessment. REVIEW TO REPAIR When a pc is to be handled or finished off by Review, we now have a different matter. The Review Auditor sees "Review to Handle" on the slip or "Review to complete case". This is his signal to do Form 26 June 1965 AS AN AUDITING ACTION. Same form, different use. One now doesn't assess with the Form. One Audits with the Form. This means one cleans it all tip, section by section as one goes along. ARC Break reads. Find out if it's a session ARC Break or a process ARC Break, and do the appropriate list, find it (or them) and indicate the By-Passed Charge (don't audit it by list). If it's an environment ARC Break adapt List I to the environment. Locate and indicate the, ByPassed Charge. DON'T go on with ARC Break reading when Review is handling the pc. Clean it up. Clean everything else up. Polish Lip the entire form 26 June 65 and leave it all beaming. Now do what's indicated with the case such as Former Release Rehab or flatten unflat processes. If the case turns out on the Form to be an Ethics type, have the Examiner send to Ethics and don't do anything else after finding the pc is an Ethics type. No Case Gain in the past = SP. Roller Coaster = PTS. Leave it to Ethics to find out why. When (and 59 if) the pc gets a clean "bill of health" from Ethics (has disconnected or whatever) Review can get the pc back again and finish up the incomplete actions outlined in this section. In short, in "Review to handle" one handles the whole case and finishes it off. The same form (Form 26 June 1965) can be used in two different ways: as an assessment and as an auditing list of things to handle. STUDENT ASSISTS On a student assist the Review auditor uses Form 26 June 65 as an assessment form and handles what is found on the form. The Review auditor does not fail to do the form and also does not fail to handle what was found during assessment after it is done. Note, one assesses, then handles what was found. He doesn't audit the whole form. And also Review doesn't complete the case as a case. It's just an assist. Public assists are done the same way in Review. DECLARE? FOR RELEASE When the Examiner does not declare a pc and does not send the pc to Certs and Awards, he sends the pc to Review. (He can also, instead, send the pc to Ethics.) When the Examiner sends a Declare? to Review, instead of Declaring, the Review Auditor does Form 26 June 65 as an assessment, locates the trouble and after the assessment is done handles what was found or indicates it's an Ethics matter. in either case (audits or sends to Ethics) the Review Auditor hands the pc back to the Examiner. The Examiner may now send the pc to Certs and Awards to get the Release award, or to Ethics to handle the indicated Ethics matter (usually PTS situation). But the Examiner must not send the pc back to the HGC after the Case Supervisor has said Declare? (except when the Declare? is for an earlier stage than the pc is being audited for). If anything else has to be done, Review does it. BASIS OF QUAL ACTIONS You see Qual Div handles the flat ball bearings that didn't roll on the assembly line of the HGC. Qual is wholly in the flat ball bearing business. The HGC and Academy are wholly in the assembly line business, dealing in fairly round ball bearings. So when the HGC or Academy has said that's it (either, "We can't handle" or "Declare?" or "graduate") it's now up to Qual. If the pc or student is not a Release or not well skilled or the pc doesn't think he or she is a Release or the student feels he can't make it, then it's all up to Review. Qual's tools for the student are the Assist and Cramming Section and for the pc are I . 26 June 65 Form 2. Any standard process or auditing action. 3. HCO B 30 June 65 and any other Former Release Rehabilitation HCO B. HGC USES OF QUAL TOOLS The HGC also uses these same tools. The Case Supervisor commonly orders one of his or her auditors to do 26 June 1965 form. On Power Processing and Former Release Rehab, an HGC Intensive on a pc always starts with: 1. The old pc assessment form from Dianetic days (if not already done and in hand on the pc). 2. 116 June 65 Form (if the pc has ever been audited before). It cuts down the clutter and keeps auditors calmer and makes assignment easier when the HGC uses the Qua] tools routinely and only squawks when baffled. Qual takes over on a pc if the HGC has really goofed or has mis-Declared? 60 The HGC assembly line considers all pcs, a bit dented and runs an assembly line on the basis of "some dents in ball bearings must be handled in the HGC". When the ball bearing just won't roll at all in the HGC, the Case Supervisor throws in the chips and says "To Review to Handle." If the Case Supervisor wants a check on his auditor, he says "To Review for check." And the HGC gets the pc back. Students and public wanting assists are sent straight to Review by the Registrar, by-passing the HGC as this is bit and piece auditing. THE EIGHT BIG RULES Qual (and the HGC) are not exempt from handling the Eight Big Rules of auditing: 1. A pc must never be audited while ARC Broken. (Assessment of a list is not auditing unless one is Auditing by List meaning cleaning up each line, not looking for the thing on the List.) 2. A pc will make no case progress while suffering from a Present Time Problem which fixes his attention on the environment. 3. A pc with withholds will be critical, natter or blow and is out of comm. 4. A pc will worsen after auditing if connected to a Suppressive Person (and only worsens when so connected). 5. A pc who makes no case gains is Suppressive (and can only be handled by Power Processes and a Class VII Auditor). 6. Auditing a pc past a state of Release on the processes of that stage can make the pc's tone arm rise and bar further case gain even at upper stages of Release. (If you don't rehabilitate at least in part a 1st Stage, Release that was overrun, you won't get results at the 2nd Stage or any higher stage. If you don't rehab an overrun on 2nd Stage you won't get results on Third Stage, etc. Also, a pc who went I st Stage on R6EW won't run on 2nd Stage until the I st Stage is found. In some cases the pc won't now run on 2nd Stage if he went 4th Stage, by-passing the lot. In short you can't by-pass free needles.) 7. A pc whose needle doesn't react to the auditor even at TA 2 or 3 may be ARC Broken, not Released. 8. An auditor's fractured Comm Cycle, unseen additives, lack of skill on a meter, attitude or false report can make a standard process not seem to work, and only these may make one work toward unusual solutions and get unreal about standard tech. There are other rules. They are important but not as important as each of the EIGHT BIG RULES. Therefore, the. only unusual solution you ever have to take in auditing is to straighten up one of the Eight Big Rules when it's out on the pc It is rare but can happen. Example: Pc's ARC Break is too bad to get a read on any of the lower lines of Form 26 June 65. Obviously, then, to assess Form 26 June 65 at all on a few cases you have to locate and indicate the ByPassed Charge. In checking a free needle, finding it doesn't respond at all, one has to know by looking at the pc whether the pc is Keyed Out or ARC Broken. The only other bug here is "Dead Thetan" wherein the old "Stage 4" needle so called has never responded to anyone (this is obvious as the pc never got any TA in auditing either). A pc can have such a withhold that he just chops the auditor or the course or the org, It's always a withhold that makes him chop or blow. Don't be reasonable about it-it's a technical fact. If an auditor really knows his Eight Big Rules, he can work then very easily with a form and know what he is looking at. The eight are on Form 26 June 65, too, you know. Only Rule 7 may prevent a straightforward assessment, as the ARC Break may have to be handled before one can get on down the list with reads. COMMON MISTAKE The Common Mistake of Review is to mistake a PTP or Withhold for an ARC Break. 61 This is easy to do. Supervisors are prone to say "Pc ARC Broken" when a pc looks nattery or gloomy. Review, although it takes no instructions on tech from Tech, can get mixed up on this too, prompted by the Supervisor's error or the pc's own statement. SPs commonly start a Review session with "I'm ARC Broken when, fact is the SP has a big withhold or PTP. REPORTS When a Review Auditor or an Examiner finds a tech mess like alter-is or the fractured comm cycle of an HGC auditor, they MUST report it to Qual See who MUST send in an Ethics chit on it. The chit is written by the Examiner or the Review Auditor and sent to Qual See for forwarding to Ethics. ONLY in this way will Examiners or Review ever hold onto their own activities. If they don't chit gross auditing errors found in pcs or in auditing instructions then their whole larger purpose is defeated. Qua] is the technical cop. Handle flat ball bearings, yes. But also proof up the Tech Division against having so many by reporting its goofs. This applies to any student received also. Qual, getting a student or pc who has then to be sent to Ethics MUST chit to Ethics whoever overlooked it in Tech. When Qual finds a student who is SP or PTS who has been on course a while, Qual must chit the student's Course Supervisor for a big goof in having the student on course at all. Similarly, Qual chits an auditor whose pc, sent to Review, turns out to be PTS or SP. The Academy or HGC must have gone stupid to be auditing or training such a student or pc. For they bring total chaos to the assembly line. Supervisors and auditors who don't send pcs, who are PTS or SP to Ethics deserve Psychiatric Awards. For they are wrecking the org by continuing to train or process such a person. So that's Qual's hat, too. When Ethics won't handle a Roller Coaster or an SP and pushes the being back into the Org Qual must cable or despatch the Office of LRH Saint Hill. We have the tech on PTS and SP. We mustn't train or audit them until the condition is handled properly in Ethics (and even then we train and process them with a cynical squint in the left eye, alert for further messes from them.) SUMMARY The technical activities of Qual are all standard, all laid out neatly. There are no unusual solutions if one does the usual as above. No need to get in a panic about a case. Do the usual. If THAT doesn't work, it was done in an unusual way, wasn't it? Qual can win all the way. Just do the usual Qual actions on the standard Qual internal routing lines, and UP goes tech standards and results. And that's what we want, don't we? L. RON HUBBARD LRH:ml.cden Copyright (c) 1965 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [Note: Correction has been made per HCOB 21 Sept AD15, in above section entitled REPORTS, paragraph 3, second sentence, changing the last word Qual to Tech.] 62 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF I FEBRUARY 1966 Gen Non-Remimeo Issue III Applies to Saint Hill HGC CURE Info other orgs INTERNE TRAINING AND STAFF AUDITORS (Results from Comm Ev I Feb 66 and my studies of situation) Interne and staff auditor and course supervisor training and the training of Tech Division executives and any and all staff training of whatever kind is transferred herewith to the Qualifications Division Department of Review. (This does not include staff members taking standard courses in the Tech Div at night.) The severe drop in the Tech Division's HGC completion statistics which began on 17 Nov 65 and reached bottom 14 Doc 65 and which did not properly recover had only one large change connected with it: HGC Interne training was transferred from the Qual Division to the Tech Division. Mending a statistic fall consists of locating the change that preceded it and undoing that change. This has been done in this Policy Letter by returning Interne training and staff auditor training back to Qual. The Committee of Evidence of I Feb 66 revealed that the then Director of Processing did not believe it possible to alter or change a statistic, that one could only explain and justify one. It is possible also that the feeling that one could not change a case was forced on staff auditors at that time. On this possibility, anyone taking charge of interne and staff auditor training should stress the truth that an auditor can change cases and can change them as fast as his auditing is smooth and by-the-book. An auditor gets completions in exact ratio to the letter perfectness of his auditing and his adherence to the exact technology we now have in Scientology. The Qual See need not necessarily change Interne Supervisors or times of training unless he sees fit. It is pointed out that he is held responsible for the quality of HGC auditor performance and technical knowledge and how he achieves this is up to him. The Director of Processing is held responsible for the amount of auditing time put in on pcs. Should results not occur by reason of poor auditor performance on the advice of the Case Supervisor he should order the auditor to Qual. And if the results are not forthcoming by reason of non-compliance with the Case Supervisor's orders he should order the auditor to Ethics for a hearing. If an auditor auditing in and for the HGC receives an order from the (c) of P or the Case Supervisor that is non-standard or is an extra-ordinary solution he must file a job endangerment chit with Ethics at once and may not execute the instruction. The principal duties of the (c) of P are to get auditors putting in auditing time and getting lots of pcs done and interview pcs, to check flatness or unflatness of processes. Checking must be done with a minimum of waiting time by the auditor and pc The (c) of P does not check out release grade attainments as this is done by the Qual Examiner and any double examination (by both (c) of P and Qual Examiner) must be held to a minimum. The (c) of P also musters his auditors before the morning session and before the afternoon session and hands out folders at these times with a minimum of session time loss. The Case Supervisor does the folders. The Case Supervisor does not interview cases but runs them by the book and folder. When a Case Supervisor interviews cases or discusses them with the (c) of P or auditor it has been found that only then do errors creep in and hold up progress. Therefore the Case Supervisor and (c) of P must not occupy the same office. The Case Supervisor may not take technical orders from the (c) of P. The Case Supervisor is under the Tech See, not the (c) of P. The (c) of P looks after staff auditors and Internes as Org personnel and is their immediate superior. The (c) of P is responsible for staff auditor procurement without absolving HCO's personnel officer from it. 63 That auditors are on the job on time and are putting in their session time and their conduct and their actions as staff members are all in the province of the (c) of P. The Qual Div's Dir Rev may remove an auditor from the active processing list if he believes that auditor is not sufficiently trained but if so must either take action to further train or inform the Qual See the auditor may not be permitted to audit, the Qual See informing the HCO Area See to transfer the person or dismiss. Before the (c) of P can assign an auditor to audit he must have an ok chit from Dir Rev. The Leading Auditor idea may be preserved or discarded at the discretion of the (c) of P. The (c) of P assigns auditors to specific cases. This is done by Tech Services in actual fact but only after consultation with or approval of the (c) of P. The Case Supervisor may order a staff auditor to review for clumsiness or to Ethics for noncompliance but must do so through the (c) of P on whose actual authority it is done. The daily summary of results by the HGC is compiled by the Case Supervisor and promptly posted on a public board. Auditors sent to Ethics or Review and pcs, sent to Ethics or Review are noted by name on this board. TABLE OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR HGC STAFF AUDITORS AND INTERNES Org Exec See - Full responsibility for quantity and quality of service. Qual See - Training arrangements for all Tech Personnel and Internes. Satisfied pcs, Dir Exams - Authority to Declare. Dir Rev - OK to Audit chits, repair of goofs. Actual training. Satisfied pcs. Dir Certs & Awards - Declares pc awards. Chaplain - Port of refuge for pcs and auditors when all else fails. Tech See - Completion Statistic of the Tech Div, Executive Personnel appointments, general adherence to plan and design. (c) of P - Staff Auditors and Internes as Staff Members, pc auditor assignment, auditing quarters state of and assignment, Ethics and Review routing authority, auditor procurement, pc procurement, checkouts for flatness of processes, head of Dept. Case Supervisor - All Case Folders, results on cases, indicating auditors and pcs to Review or Ethics or Declare, posting results, adherence to proper technology. HCO Area See - Taking effective action on down graphs that don't recover at once. Ethics Officer - All Ethics actions referred or found necessary. Personnel Officer - Staff Auditor Procurement. Dir Registration - New Internes. I wish to point out that these were more or less the arrangements which existed prior to the slump in November, and which were in force when I was Case Supervisor. 1, as Exec Dir SH, hold the Org Exec See SH and through her the Tech See SH and Qual See SH responsible for seeing that these orders and arrangements are carried out exactly for only these will cure the HGC slump. Arid they will cure it only if exactly performed. Note: This instance of a slumped statistic brings to view a curious phenomenon I noted while studying it. Apparently there is a natural law that "where interdependence does not exist, a slump may occur". This applies to life, but it apparently is vital to an org. Where a function of an org does not have lines across two or more portions of an org, the function may slump. In this case the action of auditing and responsibility for results as earlier organized crossed Tech, Qual and HCO, 3 divisions. When Interne and staff auditor training was dropped into Tech along with the auditing also the tension went out of the line and the statistic slumped. 64 If this law is so, then any function of an org that is not dependent on 2 or more portions of the org may slump. And on checking up I have found that only those functions at Saint Hill which do not have lines into two or more divisions are already slumped. Thus a possible principle of organization exists-that a line, to function, must cross divisions. A staff member, being a terminal must not cross divisions. But lines of functions must. This is only a comment but is curious enough to be remarked. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:ml.rd Copyright (c) 1966 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF I FEBRUARY 1966 Remimeo Tech Div Qual Div STAFF AUDITOR AND SUPERVISOR PROCUREMENT The Director of Processing is responsible for procuring qualified staff auditors, regardless of any action by Dept 1, Div 1. This has always been the case and always will be. The Director of Training is responsible for procuring Academy or College Supervisors regardless of any action by Dept I Div 1. Neither of these policies absolves Dept I Div I from the procurement of staff Auditors and Supervisors. QUAL DIV TRAINS STAFF The Qualifications Division trains staff Auditors, Internes, Supervisors, Ds of T, Ds of P and Tech Secs. No other division than Qualifications may train staff. Note: A recent slump in Tech statistics at Saint Hill followed at once in a shift of training of Internes from Qual to Tech Divisions. Note: A slump in HGC completions was traced to the Tech Sec and D of P taking no interest or action in procuring HGC Auditors. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:ml.cden Copyright (c) 1966 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 65 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 10 FEBRUARY 1966 Remimeo Issue II Tech Hats Qual Hats Ethics Hats TECH RECOVERY My study of a Noy 1965 plummeting HGC Completion statistic indicates certain policies are necessary in all HGCs and Qual Divisions. The following errors were found: I . The HGC ceased to look for former release grades to rehabilitate and ignored opportunities to do so on the basis that "outer orgs have rehabbed them all already". This came out in the Comm Ev held on a (c) of P of that period. Of course, if the HGC failed to rehab earlier grades (or earlier life overruns) it could achieve no later grades or Grade V. This alone would have ended completions promptly on all grades and wiped out the graph. 2. Invalidation of the appearance of a free needle and invalidating any auditor who "thought he saw one". This wiped out all release attainments and made for total overrun of all pcs of all grades. This error existed for 15 years so it is not surprising that it act back in again. 3. Whenever an overrun occurred, "rehabilitation of it" was done by running different new processes instead of standard rehab routine as in HCOBs, i.e. Doing ARC Break, PTPs, Rudiments, anything but a real rehab of that process that was overrun. 4. Abandonment of standard tech in favour of unusual solutions. This is always present when a collapse of Tech occurs. 5. One SP was found in the middle of all this but after his departure the statistic did not recover so one can assume another SP was in the middle of it still or that the HGC remained PTS and didn't separate from the SP found because he was so convincing, so reasonable and so persuasive as to why a Tech statistic must remain down. It is interesting that (1) above-ceasing to rehab lower grades-would be absolutely fatal to any upper grades. Therefore this becomes policy: NO UPPER GRADE OF RELEASE MAY BE BEGUN NEWLY ON A PC UNTIL ALL LOWER GRADES ARE FULLY REHABBED TO FREE NEEDLE. THIS APPLIES TO ALL GRADES 0 TO VII. Regarding (2)- Invalidation of what a free needle is-and thus running past all free needles, let it be noted that this is an Auditor's Code Break-continuing a process that has ceased to produce change and is therefore a crime. This was wrong too long to be allowed to go wrong again. Thus we get the policy: AN AUDITOR WHO HAS BEEN FOUND TO HAVE OVERRUN A FREE NEEDLE ON A PRECLEAR MUST BE GIVEN AN ETHICS CHIT; AND IF THE ACTION IS SEVERAL TIMES REPEATED, ETHICS MUST ORDER A FULL REVIEW OF THE AUDITOR'S CASE INCLUDING AN EYESIGHT TEST AND CONDUCT A THOROUGH ETHICS INVESTIGATION AND HEARING. Note that a Mark V Meter run with too high a sensitivity does not give a marked change when a needle floats. Thus sensitivity must be reduced in ordinary running and increased only to get in rudiments. Then a free needle becomes more visible. A Mark V cranked up to 128 sensitivity looks like a floating needle all the time at a casual glance on most pcs. Sensitivity 5 is ample. Also, meters go out of 5,000 ohm calibration and don't read on the M and F "Clear" reads and change of electrodes can change M and F "Clear" reads. A free needle, if a process is overrun vanishes with just one extra command so an auditor must be alert. Please also note that this has been part of the Auditor's Code for ages-running past a flat point of a process has been forbidden since the first formulations of the Auditor's Code. 66 Regarding (3)- Rehabilitation by using other processes-the HCOBs on rehabs are very explicit. To run another process would clobber the pc. Thus we get the policy: REHABILITATIONS MUST BE DONE BY REHABILITATING THE PC ONLY ON THE PROCESS OVERRUN AND ONLY BY STANDARD HCOBS ON REHAB PROCEDURE. Re (4)-Unusual solutions-we get the policy: ANY AUDITOR ACCEPTING AN UNUSUAL SOLUTION WITHOUT FILING A JOB ENDANGERMENT CHIT OR FOUND USING AN UNUSUAL SOLUTION MUST BE CHARGED WITH A CRIME AND GIVEN AN ETHICS HEARING. FAILING TO REPORT AN UNUSUAL SOLUTION ADVISED OR USED IS ALSO SO HANDLED. AN UNUSUAL SOLUTION IS ONE EVOLVED TO REMEDY AN ABUSE OF EXISTING TECHNOLOGY. On (5)-Statistic failing to recover after an SP is spotted in a department gives us the 2 policies: WHENEVER AN SP IS DISCOVERED AND DECLARED IN AN ORGANIZATION ALL HIS ASSOCIATES IN THAT PORTION OF THE ORG MUST BE CHECKED OUT FOR OR GIVEN AN S & D. and WHEN AN SP IS DISCOVERED IN AN ORGANIZATION, IS DISMISSED OR REMOVED AND THE STATISTIC DOES NOT RECOVER, ANOTHER SP MUST BE LOOKED FOR. It is noted that the general condition of the Completion Statistic of Dee 65 to Jan 66 could be attributed to the above gross errors. It is now certain that (1) Rehabilitation of earlier grades, (2) Free Needle and (3) Rehabilitation by standard practice are primary targets in our technology for anyone seeking to mess it up and that unwitting tampering with these three things and lack of HCO Enforcement on them will reduce HGC statistics and prevent their recovery. Of course one could also go mad in the opposite direction-(1) rehabilitate earlier grades endlessly on a pc regardless of how many times a free needle had been obtained, (2) call any loosening up of a needle a free needle and (3) refuse to even 2-way comm with a pc under repair for overrun for fear it violates standard procedure for rehab. The middle course is the correct course in this case. Relax and just be very sure the pc has been properly rehabbed to free needle on each grade up to the one one is going to start by demanding the awards of release that were granted and if these weren't ever awarded, then do the rehabs necessary grade by grade. The only sticky point in this is that if a pc had ever been run on a higher grade without rehab of a lower, one must rehab "from the top down" at times, tackling the highest overrun first, but nevertheless doing all of them that were by-passed eventually. The way to recognize a free needle is watch for one. When it happens you will see one. Then you will never afterwards wonder. The free needles available on a case can all be swallowed up by a failure to rehab all grades ever by-passed or overrun. If no free needles show up on a case at all then partially rehab any grade available for rehab back and forth until one has one of them go free needle and then get a free needle on the remainder. Life can also be an overrun and a pc never audited will respond to a rehab of "something overdone". This doesn't mean the pc went release before Scientology-it means that purpose overrun then jams-rehab of life situations of overrun consists of hitting the purpose that was overrun and when this is hit, the pc goes release in PT and was not a release in the past. An example is an overrun located in 20 AD when the person, alert to Christianity decided to be good, made it and then overran it for 1945 years. When the purpose was found (to be good) and dated and the overrun spotted the needle went free. Rough auditing, bad TRs, "letting the pc Itsa", etc can swallow up free needles. Also a totally ARC Broke meter that won't read at all with bad indicators all over the place won't record a read, looks sometimes like a floating needle, the difference being the pc has total bad indicators-sour, mean, sad, etc. A free needle occurs most often after a big cognition and the unskilled auditor looks at the pc who is being bright and interesting and just doesn't see the needle float, asks more questions and overruns, and the free needle vanisheswhen a pc is cogniting, look at the meter not the pc. And the instant the TA starts up and the needle goes sticky suspect an overrun and check. 67 As for doing something else rather than Standard Procedure for rehab, plain ignorance can cause it. The auditor's desire to help the pc if unaccompanied by solid tech background leads to wild efforts, new processes and anything but cool standard procedure, When the person checking out pcs is also the case supervisor, unusual solutions creep in. The most errors I've seen made by a Case Supervisor were made after he had seen the pc or talked with the auditor. Cases have to be run by report only and auditors have to be supervised and their sessions listened to by somebody else besides the Case Supervisor. Tech is Tech. There is such a thing as Standard Tech. Pc wild tales and hollow eyes and auditor hobby horses have to be kept off Case Supervisor lines. So there must be a person who checks out pcs and supervises auditors and their auditing performance but who never opens his or her face to suggest instructions about the pc and only writes down that the auditor is rough or the process is flat or the process is overrun. The Case Supervisor lives in an Ivory tower. Sounds strange but unless it's done that way, wild departures from Standard Rehab Procedure and from Standard Tech in general will occur. Hell, all psychiatry went down that drain-the desperate patient, the desperate measures. Squirrelling stems from the Case Supervisor being the auditor supervisor and the pc interviewer. Oil, water, being in two divisions, Commies and Fascists, dogs and cats won't mix. Neither will the personal contacter of auditors and pcs and the Case Supervisor ever successfully stay crossed. The individual practitioner breaks down only because he does both auditing and Case Supervision. Auditing is an organization action which is why today we have Field Staff Members and HGCs. Additional notes of things discovered in the investigation of the plummeted statistic on Completions were: I . Auditors rabbiting out of uncertainty and so stumbling past End Phenomena and floating needles, 2. Case Supervisor getting auditors to ask leading questions on Pr Pr 2-"Ask the pc if he is interested in Medical Practices". 3. (c) of P: "Find out what the needle is floating on". 4. Case Supervisor: Told auditor that a floating needle was not the End Phenomenon of a Process in which "the TA had to be run out". 5. Lack of knowledge and understanding of the Technology and not knowing the difference between such things as Anaten, Secondaries and Engrams by Case Supervisor, (c) of P, and so confusing auditors. Of course the one thing one can't technically overcome is an SP keeping an area messed up. His case doesn't improve because of his intentions and overts and fear of people getting better or being bigger than he. When an SP dominates an area, only Ethics actions can handle. The primary indicator of the presence of an SP in an org is a plummeting statistic immediately after he starts handling a portion of it. Indifferent leadership, even inaction can't drive a statistic down. Only active suppression can. So watch the statistics and don't get reasonable when they fall. Either outside the org suppression has been brought down on that portion of the org, making it PTS or there is an SP there. The final answer is what happened just before the statistic fell. If a new appointment was made and it fell, unappoint it fast. If nothing cures the down statistic find the SP or handle the PTS situation because one or the other are there. Completions stayed down for 15 years. Then we found auditors never noticed free needles. Now for Heaven's sakes, 15 years was enough. Don't repeat the error! It does work you know. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:ml.rd Copyright (c) 1966 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 68 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 MARCH 1966 Remimeo All Scn Staff Tech & Qual HGC CURE (Continued) Long after I thought the final findings were all in in the Nov-Dec 65 HGC Completion Slump, another really gross HGC error showed up. Training of HGC auditors was shifted from Qual to Tech Div just before the fantastic down curve. This change was known and caused a heavy investigation of the HGC. But this datum was not disclosed until later: STAR-RATED CHECK OUTS ON INTERNES AND AUDITORS DESPITE EXPLICIT INSTRUCTIONS WERE DROPPED THE MOMENT THE TRANSFER FROM QUAL TO TECH OCCURRED. The newer auditors began to audit with no real data. Thus we find the SP discovered in that investigation had discovered a thorough way to depress a statistic-you didn't require check outs on processes. This gives us another vital datum IF YOU DO NOT REQUIRE HGC AUDITORS AND INTERNES TO CHECK OUT STAR-RATED ON THEIR MATERIALS BEFORE THEY AUDIT HGC PCS THE COMPLETION STATISTIC WILL GO TO ZERO. It did at once. I think lack of this one datum has been holding back all the statistics in any org that has not recovered. Lack of star-rates on staff auditors and internes has been found to crash an HGC and deliver no service. Remedy it at once on all staff auditors, internes and supervisors. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:ml.rd Copyright (c) 1966 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 69 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 MARCH 1966 Issue II Remimeo All Tech & Qual Hats Students Solo Audit Course Tech & Qual Interne Course Clearing Course URGENT STAR RATES ON TECH AND QUAL STAFF Effective on Receipt ETHICS NOTE ALL ORGS - It is a High Crime not to have this Policy continually in effect after I June 66 as it has been found to suppress orgs when not kept in effect and to crash HGCs. All HCO Bs and Tech Info and Advices of the following courses are STAR RATED and the student may not begin to audit until they have all been passed with Star-Rated type check outs with no comm lag. INTERNE COURSE (Power Process and HGC Staff Auditors) CLEARING COURSE (but not the platens) All vital data required for auditing at Level VI must be checked out, Star-Rated on the following Course: SOLO AUDIT COURSE All HGC and Qual Auditors and Internes must pass in all Scientology Orgs star-rated all HCO Bs directly concerned with all the Level Processes they will use on pcs, Rehabs, S & (c) and various Review actions and the Pol Ltrs governing the HGC and Review and any relation to Ethics before being permitted to audit an HGC pc in any HGC anywhere or to audit in Review. Note: The above data applies to all orgs when they teach the listed courses and applies to all HGCs at once. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:ml.rd Copyright (c) 1966 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 70 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 8 MARCH 1966 Remimeo Exec Sees Hats Exec - HCO - Tech - Qual ES Comm Qual Hat Ethics HCO Sec Hat Dir I & R Hat Ethics Hat URGENT Tech & Qual Hats LRH Comm Hat HIGH CRIME Effective I June 1966 In any instance of a heavily falling statistic in Tech or Qual or a chronically low statistic in Tech or Qual in an org or in any org which has chronically low statistics in all divisions: The Ethics Officer must look for this policy violation which is the highest crime in Tech and Qual: TOLERATING THE ABSENCE OF, OR NOT INSISTING UPON STAR-RATED CHECK OUTS ON ALL PROCESSES AND THEIR IMMEDIATE TECHNOLOGY AND ON RELEVANT POLICY LETTERS ON HGC INTERNES OR STAFF AUDITORS IN THE TECH DIV OR STAFF AUDITORS OR INTERNES IN THE QUAL DIV FOR THE LEVELS AND ACTIONS THEY WILL USE BEFORE PERMITTING THEM TO AUDIT ORG PCS AND ON SUPERVISORS IN TECH AND QUAL WHO INSTRUCT OR EXAMINE OR FAILING TO INSIST UPON THIS POLICY OR PREVENTING THIS POLICY FROM GOING INTO EFFECT OR MINIMIZING THE CHECK OUTS OR LISTS. If an Ethics Officer or any person in HCO Dept 3 discovers this high crime to exist he must report it at once to the HCO Area Secretary. The HCO Area Secretary must at once order a thorough investigation into any and all persons who might have instigated this high crime and report the matter to the HCO Exec Sec. The HCO Exec Sec must then convene a Committee of Evidence with the persons accused as interested parties and must locate amongst them the suppressive or suppressives by the "reasonableness" of their defence, state of case and other signs. The Committee of Evidence must declare the located S.P. suppressive by HCO Ethics Order and dismiss. If any Ethics Officer, Director of I & R or HCO Area Secretary fails to obtain co-operation by superiors in carrying out this Policy Letter quickly then he or she must inform the LRH Communicator. The LRH Communicator must then cable full particulars to Worldwide. The Worldwide AdCouncil must then carry out this policy letter expeditiously and at any cost. If the HCO personnel making this discovery cannot obtain action in any other way he or she must go outside the org and cable LRH Comm WW and his actions and costs in so cabling will be reimbursed on claim to WW and his post will be fully protected. 71 If the AdCouncil WW suspects this policy not to be in full force in any org despite assurances an HCO WW personnel must be sent to that org to investigate and may be deputized to remove either or both Exec Sees of that org by Comm Ev on the spot or at WW. It has been discovered that failure to check out, Star Rated, the Tech and Qual HCO Bs applying to levels being audited or taught or examined and their processes and the data used in Review and relevant policy on those using the material in orgs results in a crashed Division 4 completion statistic, crashed income and low statistics throughout and a failing org and was the reason through 1965 for struggling orgs-the public would not pay more for service than it was worth to them and with this policy out, the service was not worth very much. It has been found that a suppressive person will discourage this check out policy as one of his first actions. This policy applies whether an auditor has been trained or not with star-rated check outs. Staff and Review auditor and Supervisor are special technical status grades and one cannot consider this double training. "Star-Rated" means = 100 percent letter perfect in knowing and understanding, demonstrating and being able to repeat back the material with no comm lag. Org Exec See Communicator for Qual WW is the final authority for any check sheets on this matter and is responsible for preparing and standardizing them from time to time. But the lack of a check sheet from ES Comm Qual WW does not set aside any provision or penalty of this policy letter. This policy letter is issued in the complete knowledge that the absence of this policy in full effect is the primary reason for orgs not growing and is based on actual experience. The only higher crime I could think of would be to pretend to have an org but have no technical personnel on staff in Tech or Qual. That is suppressive also and will crash an org. Handle it similarly to the above. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:ml.cden Copyright (c) 1966 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [Added to by HCO P/L 21 November 1971, Scientology Courses Examination Policy, Volume 5-page 139, which made it firm policy that anyone examining a student for certification on any Scientology Course, including Admin, must have first star-rated related Policies, HCO Bs or other issues before writing or grading exams.] [Note: In the original issue of this Policy Letter the words "THE ABSENCE OF" in the first line of the 3rd paragraph were omitted. However, in a poster issued by Flag in 1971 quoting this capitalized paragraph of the "High Crime" P/L, these words were included, and accordingly have been added in this printing. - Ed.] 72 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 28 DECEMBER 1967 Remimeo Star Rated on All Qual Personnel and on Exec Secs and Secs QUAL SENIOR DATUM The Senior datum of Qual is that: QUAL NEVER NEVER NEVER TAKES THE ORDER OR DIRECTION OF ANY OTHER DIVISION OR STAFF MEMBER ON WHAT TO DO TECHNICALLY WITH A STUDENT OR PC. Qual only really comes into action when other divisions and staff of other divisions have failed. So if they knew what to do the person would not be turning up in Qual for tech remedies. So if Qual takes their orders of what to do it will also fail. This datum originated at SH when Qual, in a collapse, was found to be obediently doing what Div 4 and Dept 3 ordered on students and pcs. It was getting no results. I analyzed the situation and over a period of a couple of weeks worked on it. The result was the above datum and the GREEN FORM. Qual always does its own analysis and its own internal routings independent of other directions. It can use any process ever released and a Review auditor must be able to do them. The GREEN FORM must be added to from time to time as new difficulties are found due to advancing technology or new errors developed by poor training. A student sent by Tech See for Cramming may be routed instead by Qual to case repair if that is what is needed. The keynote of Qual is CORRECTION. This of course applicable to diagnosis as well. NO OTHER DIVISION MAY CHIT QUAL FOR REFUSING TO OBEY THEIR DIRECTIONS REGARDING WHAT TO DO WITH STUDENTS OR PCs. Other divisions are assembly lines. Qual is an individual approach. Qual's Review only gets flat ball bearings-which could not or would not roll on the assembly line of Div 4. People can't be sent to Qual for "disagreements checks" "see checks" or other stated actions as these are an attempted diagnosis and will normally be found to be the wrong process. Qua] is the students' and pcs' friend. A last refuge when other doors close. AND cases must leave Qual and students must leave Qual WITH THE WHOLE THING HANDLED in a way that will STAY HANDLED. Qual has no Qual Div for the Qual Div. When it goes irresponsible and lets an unhandled case or student out, then that person HAS NO PLACE TO TURN. I know how bad a failed Qual case can be because when I'm in an org, having no part of the org to go to (unless the Chaplain) they come to me. I usually find (a) that 73 some imaginary rule has stopped the person's progress or policy has been used to stop or (b) that Qual was obedient to some other division and (c) always that Qual has either not been approached or has failed when it was. So the senior datum of Qual is important, There is another datum in Qual that is very important. And that is: NO AUDITOR MAY BE EMPLOYED IN QUAL WHO CANNOT SUCCESSFULLY LIST AND ASSESS FLAWLESSLY WITHOUT ANY ERRORS. All you have to do to wreck Qual is put an auditor in it who is not letter perfect in ALL the tech of listing and assessing. (Some isolated summary is not enough-all the original tapes and all the original HCOBs must be studied to make an auditor able in listing and assessing. It is the weakest applied point in our tech-too many can't or don't learn how to do it. But a Qual auditor MUST be a shark on it.) One can say that the health of an org depends on Qual finally handling. The key processes which keep an org healthy are new (67) style Remedy A, Remedy B and S & Ds and the GREEN FORM. These are listing and assessing or assessing processes. Thus the vital tech is listing and assessing. So Qual auditors have to be carefully trained to do these perfectly. At this writing Qual is being streamlined into a new fast flow pattern. This policy still applies and in 2068 will still apply and in 200068 as well. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:jp.cden Copyright (c) 1967 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 2 MARCH 1968 (Modifies P/L 15 Sept 1967) Remimeo QUAL SEC MUST BE CLEAR The policy that the Examiner must be clear is modified to Qual See must be a clear. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:js.rd Copyright (c) 1968 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 74 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 13 MARCH 1968 Remimeo All Execs IMPORTANT STATISTICS A prediction of a collapse of gross income can be made on the following graph pattern Tech Qual Future Completions Income Gross Income Evaluation Invalidation Bad Listing) of PCs Students & ff Tech Staff in the Qual Div. Where Evaluation, Invalidation and Bad Listing of PCs, students and tech staff pulled in for Review are present in the Qual Div, the completions of Tech are reduced and given forceful collectives, the Qual Stat soars. This inhibits buying of future levels and the public, seeing no fast changes stays away. A high Qual Income Stat is an alert to a collapse of gross income and has already happened in some Orgs. LRH:jc.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright(c) 1968 Founder by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 4 OCTOBER 1970 Remimeo QUAL HAS NO BACKLOG (Originally issued as LRH ED 61 INT, 9 Dec'68) Stable Datum - Quals never have backlogs ever never. Even if all hands have to audit. Backlogs kill the whole flow line. A I hour wait is a backlog. People waiting for days or weeks is of course unthinkable and subject to Comm Ev on a Qual See for being unable to recruit or train Qual staff or cope with traffic irregularities of flow. Qual, as in Tech, is there to DELIVER SERVICE not to choke flow lines. LRH:sb.ka.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright (c) 1970 Founder by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 75 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF IS NOVEMBER 1969 Issue II Remimeo Cl VIII Checksheet Dianetics Checksheet Qual Sec Hat Tech See Hat C/S Hat RIGHTS AND DUTIES The following Rights and Duties are to be posted in the staff area of every Qual Division and Tech Division, where they will be frequently seen by auditors and technical personnel. They are to be printed green on white in letters at least I inch high, each on a separate card (4 total). AN AUDITOR HAS THE DUTY: TO KNOW AND ABIDE BY THE AUDITOR'S CODE TO APPLY TECH EXACTLY AS PER HCOBS AND LRH TAPES TO BE THOROUGHLY FAMILIAR WITH THE FOLDER OF ANY PC HE AUDITS TO FOLLOW C/S INSTRUCTIONS EXACTLY IN SESSION TO REFUSE TO AUDIT AN INCORRECT C/S TO AUDIT ONLY THOSE MATERIALS ON WHICH HE HAS BEEN CHECKED OUT STARRATE TO BE FAMILIAR WITH AND APPLY ALL NEW TECHNICAL MATERIALS UP TO HIS CLASS LEVEL AN AUDITOR HAS THE RIGHT: NOT TO AUDIT A PRECLEAR HE DOES NOT WISH TO AUDIT NOT TO AUDIT MORE THAN 5 HOURS PER DAY, 6 DAYS PER WEEK TO REFUSE A C/S HE KNOWS TO BE INCORRECT TO ASK TO BE REFERRED TO THE HCOB COVERING A CIS HE IS UNCERTAIN OF OR FEELS IS INCORRECT NOT TO BE PUNISHED FOR QUERYING A C/S WHETHER CORRECT OR NOT TO HAVE PCS, AUDITING ROOMS, AND MATERIALS MADE AVAILABLE TO HIM BY TECH SERVICES 76 · CASE SUPERVISOR HAS THE DUTY: TO REFUSE TO DISCUSS A CASE WITH EITHER THE AUDITOR OR THE PC TO REFRAIN FROM DISCUSSING OR MENTIONING DATA FROM PC FOLDERS SOCIALLY TO CORRECT HIS AUDITORS' APPLICATION OF TECH POSITIVELY, WITHOUT INVALIDATION TO ORDER THE AUDITOR TO CRAMMING OR RETRAINING FOR ANY FLUNKED SESSION TO MAINTAIN A STANDARD OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT TO CIS ALL FOLDERS DELIVERED TO HIM DAILY · CASE SUPERVISOR HAS THE RIGHT: TO HAVE HIS OWN OFFICE TO HOLD NO OTHER POST NEVER TO RUSH HIS OWN CIS ACTIONS TO ACCEPT NO TECHNICAL ORDERS OR ADVICES OTHER THAN FROM LRH TO DEMAND A HIGH ADMINISTRATIVE STANDARD OF THOSE WHO WORK ON HIS LINES TO DEMAND THAT PCS DO NOT DISCUSS THEIR OWN CASES OR OTHERWISE VIOLATE PC RULES TO ISSUE AND GET COMPLIANCE ON ANY ORDERS NECESSARY TO THE PERFORMANCE OF HIS DUTY AND TECHNICAL RESULTS Lt. Nate Jessup, Chairman Ens. Janet Guilford, Secretary W/O Bob Guilford, Member Qual Board of Investigation for L RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:NJ:JG:BG:nt.rd Copyright (c) 1969 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 77 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 29 MARCH 1965 Issue II Gen Non-Remimeo ADMINISTRATION FLOWS AND EXPANSION THE FAST FLOW SYSTEM We have introduced many new principles in administration in recent policy letters. Here is one which if left out would cause mystery. This is the principle of traffic flows we now use. It is called the FAST FLOW SYSTEM OF MANAGEMENT. A being controlling a traffic or activity flow should let the flow run until it is to be reinforced or indicates a turbulence will occur and only then inspects the part of the flow that is to be reinforced or is becoming enturbulated and inspects and acts on only that one flow. This principle would operate on a committee of 3 in this fashion: the committee does not act as a body. Each member acts individually in three spheres of influence (three types of flow). There is no committee (collective) action until one of the three members wants concurrence from the other two on greatly reinforcing a flow or until the other two, by observation, see the third is going adrift. Only in these cases does the committee act as a Committee. In other words all 3 members go about their work independently until there is a change in one of their three spheres and then they act. Otherwise the flows of orders and actions are independent. Not doing it like this is why Committees have gotten the reputation of being unable and a waste of time. To do this one, of course, needs another principle: that of Indicators. An Indicator is something that signals an approaching change rather than finding the change is already present and confirmed. We get this from auditing. An auditor audits so long as things go evenly. He knows when they will begin to deteriorate or change by an Indicator. He acts on seeing the indicator. He doesn't wait until the collapse or total change of the pc occurs and then look it over and act, The pc could be run into the ground or a good process that was bettering the case could be neglected if an auditor could not PREDICT from indicators how it was going before it was gone. In supervising a number of sections or departments, it would work this way: The person in charge does not examine every action or decision on the lines. If all despatches of all the activities went through his or her one pair of hands the volume would be too great and would jam. The executive's "plate" would be too full and this would halt any expansion of the activities as the executive would feel overworked, yet in actual fact would be getting nothing much done. The flows which needed watching would be buried in a huge volume of flows that did not need watching. Instead, the principle of flows tells us that the executive should have statistical INDICATORS such as OIC charts on every part of the activity each week and should act only on the basis of the charts' behaviors. If a chart went down the Executive would not wait for that area to collapse before inspecting it. At a dip point the executive should go over all the plans and traffic and despatches of the area dipping down and unearth the real reason why it did dip. If the matter needs minor remedy, it should be corrected. If then the graph still dipped down, the executive would not only be advised of it by the OIC Indicators but would know, having inspected earlier, what had to be done on a more drastic scale to get the graph going up again. The OIC system must be used and all data plotted and circulated to the Executives in an org before this system will work. If the OIC system is put into effect fully the executive can then (and only then) let go the comm lines and let the traffic flow. 78 He then only needs to: I Keep alert for and correct Dev-T (off-line, off-policy, off-origin and noncompliance); 2. Keep an eye on the weekly OIC charts; 3. Find from OIC the upward trends and inspect and find out what's working so well it can be reported; 4. Be alert to any down dip and inspect the activity itself and correct the matter; and 5. Spend most of his time getting his own job done (since executives do have jobs besides supervision). The one thing he mustn't do is "get reasonable" about dips or zooms and not act to really check the decline or to reinforce the rise: (a) Thinking one does know when he has not gotten it inspected closely; (b) Not believing the graph and Indicators; and (c) Not acting, are the fatal errors. Doing I to 5 tells us who's an executive and doing (a), (b) and (c) tells us who shouldn't be an executive. If this system is in effect the org can't help but boom. We will call this the FAST FLOW SYSTEM OF MANAGEMENT. It is a very precise art. It's like auditing. One predicts the slumps and reinforces the tendency to boom. It can't miss. If it's done completely. LRH:ml.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright(c) 1965 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [LRH NOTE: Study this. Shows why of OIC HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 6 FEBRUARY 1968 Remimeo ORGANIZATION - THE FLAW I looked for a long time for any flaw in the idea of organization. It does have a flaw. The basic flaw in organization is INSPECTION BEFORE THE FACT. That means inspection before anything bad has happened. Violations are so harmful they destroyed every great civilization -the Roman, the British, the lot. For every flow is slowed or stopped. The prosperity of any organization is directly proportional to the speed of its particles-goods, people, papers. World trade, world shipping, world prosperity is dying only because of the cumulative effect of inspection before the fact. Passports, customs, safety regulations, general government interference before anything bad has occurred add up to a SUPPRESSIVE SOCIETY and therefore, soon enough, a dead one. Penalty after the fact has occurred disciplines the criminals and does not pull down the majority to criminal level. Scientology organizations must never lose sight of the reason organizations have decayed. LRH:adv.rd Copyright (c) 1968 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard Founder ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 79 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex Gen Non Remimeo HCO POLICY LETTER OF 4 MAY 1965 HATS: Tech See (c) of P (c) of T Staff Auditors RELEASE AWARD Qual Sec Dir Exam SAINT HILL Dir Rev CC Officer Dir Certs Where a Staff Auditor in Review or Sthil HGC brings a pc to Release, the following procedure and routing must be followed: The Staff Auditor brings the folder and pc to the (c) of P or, if in Review the Case Cracking Section Officer. The (c) of P or CC Officer verifies from the folder and Staff Auditor that the processes ordered have produced the exact result required of them. The (c) of P or CC Officer sends the folder to the safeguarded and locked Case Files in Archives and a chit to the Tech See who passes it to the Qual Sec. A copy of the chit, stating that the pc has been brought to a state of Release and that the processes used have been precisely applied and produced the exact required result, is given the pc. The pc presents the chit to Examinations. Examinations looks at the pc and unless bad indicators are plainly in view, passes the pc on to Certifications. If the pc looks or sounds bad, Examinations diverts the pc to Review and calls the Tech Sec and Qual Sec on an urgent basis so that the matter can be taken up and sends the attestation to Ethics. If the pc's good indicators are obvious Examinations does not do more than log the pc's passage, and initials the pc's chit and directs the pc to Certifications. (See HCO Pol Ltr Fast Flow System of Management.) DECISIONS The Staff Auditor's termination of auditing depends entirely on the attainment of the exact phenomena required of the final process. When this is achieved, the session is terminated and the pc is routed as above. Meter phenomena will be there but is not required in the decision. (c) of P or CC Officer: The (c) of P's or CC Officer's decision is based on examination of the Auditor's reports and any personal comment by the Staff Auditor. If these show the processes produced the exact required reaction, the pc is given a chit and sent to Examinations. If not as expected, the whole matter is reported to the executive's division secretary and Ethics is sent for urgently as there is a lie or alter-is somewhere: (the processes are that exact). Examinations: Does pc have good indicators in a casual inspection, and does pc have a chit. If yes, pc goes to Certification. If no, pc goes to Review and Tech and Qual Sees are given a report and Ethics is sent for as there is a false attestation. Certification: Does pc have a chit signed by the (c) of P or CC Officer and initialled by Examinations. If yes, Certifications issues the award. If no, the matter is referred to the Qual See and Ethics is called. CERTIFICATIONS On the pc's arrival in Certifications, Certifications (a) Receives chit signed by (c) of P or CC Officer and verifies that it is initialled by Examinations and that this is the pc's right name (identification can be required). (b) Enters the pc's name and address and the date in the Release Book and initials it. 80 (c) Gives the pc a copy of HCO Info Letter of 4 May 1965. (c) Makes out an Invoice for a Release pin, no charge. (e) Issues the pc a Scientology Release pin. (f) Initials and files the chit. (g) Sends a copy of the Invoice to the Auditor. (h) Sends a copy of the Invoice to the Qual See who puts it in weekly report forwards to Inspection and Reports for OIC at the weekly reporting time. This ends the matter for the org. Grade certs and all other certs and awards are handled on more or less the same routing where awarded in an org, but most are of course based on a thorough Examination by Examinations. The above fast flow method for Release, recording and awarding is possible mainly because of the character of the processes which make the good indicators or the bad indicators completely unmistakable. Further, the number of Releases (Keyed out Clears of yesteryear) now being made in the Saint Hill HGC and Case Cracking Section are becoming too numerous to admit of a slower procedure of award. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mh.rd Copyright (c) 1965 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [Cancelled by HCO Policy Letter of 23 May 1970 in this section.] HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 9 JULY 1965 [Excerpt] Gen Non Remimeo Tech Div Qual Div QUAL GOOFS The Examiner in Dept of Examinations can goof on examining pcs, sent for declare release by not abiding by policy of his role in this. The Examiner just looks at the pc He does not examine the folder or put & on a meter. That's all been done. He just looks at the pc Pc seems bright, then he passes; pc gloomy, he sends to Review. The point is contained in the Fast Flow System. You don't check lines until there's something wrong with them. You don't try to find things wrong as the first action. The Examiner must have a reality on other hats and not try to wear them all. An Examiner can ARC Break a new release or rehabilitated release all to pieces before the person is so declared, by being nosey and suspicious. The pc is enroute to Certs and Awards. The Examiner stop is just a glance for a Release of any kind. It operates like a refusal to ack if the Examiner goes nosey at this point. LRH:ml.rd Copyright (c) 1965 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [A complete copy of this Policy Letter appears on page 142.1 81 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 21 JULY 1966 Remimeo TECH vs QUAL The general rule is laid down that, except for Declaration of Grade, Certificate or Class, Tech shall attempt to handle all it can on all cases and students and only when Tech personnel consider it hopeless (or the student or pc is ready for Declare, Cert or Grade) shall the student or pc be sent to Qual. "Review flat" is not now to be considered mandatory. The pc previously has been sent to the (c) of P and then to Qual to verify that a flat point has been reached. This routing is ended. If the auditor or Case Supervisor, either one, wants a check for the flatness of a process, only then is the pc sent to the (c) of P (not to Qual also). If the flatness indicates a grade has been attained the usual action is just send from auditor to examiner in Qual. To routinely and always send a pc for a flatness of process check is actually a violation of the Fast Flow Management System. It checks things which may be all right. Review, when it finds a rehab incomplete, should quickly route the pc back to Tech. As a general rule, only when Tech is utterly at a loss does Review take over and audit the pc. The Case Supervisor should keep and post HGC auditor "statistics" announcing goofs and wins. The Case Supervisor must require a retrain of an HGC auditor whenever a pc winds up being audited in Review. I always send the auditor to Interne Training for retrain whenever I have to send a pc to Review. Processing today is very simple but very exact, The data is all there. That's the only data. Don't add any. Just do what the HCOBs say. There are no exceptional cases. HGC auditors who over-run just don't know what a free needle is. They should ask a Clear to hold the cans so they can see one. When you check for flatness on a process gone to free needle you may overrun it. For the auditor, the (c) of P and the Examiner and Review to check, each one, for flatness, will goof up a flat point every time. For the Case Supervisor to neglect ordering retraining of his auditors when he finds pcs not doing well is a gave omission. For Tech not to carry on trying and limply turn all bits and pieces over to Qual is to train Tech into weakness. Two rules: In Tech, when all else fails, then hand it over to Review. In any difficulty, when all else fails, do what Ron says. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:lb-r.eden Copyright (c) 1966 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 82 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 6 AUGUST 1966 Gen No Non-Remimeo Full Dist SH Only Applies to SH Only DECLARE, MULTIPLE At Saint Hill HGC only, where rehabilitation is the main action below Grade V, the principle of multiple declare will be adopted for all grades below V whether released or rehabilitated. This means that a pc may be run by an HGC auditor, with the supervision of the Case Supervisor and Director of Processing, up to and including Grade IV without sending the pc to Qual for declare. When the HGC pc has attained Grade IV, the pc is then routed to the Qual Examiner who passes (or flunks the pc) for Grades 0 to IV. Certs and Awards will print and issue a combination 0-IV Release Certificate and issue that when the pc arrives at Certs and Awards for multiple declare. The pc may be given a slip by the auditor denoting the attainment of each lower grade or rehab of it, not as a cert but as an acknowledgement. The pc can then turn this into the Examiner when up for multiple declare. Those pcs, who are audited for just one grade at a time (such as staff pcs or student pcs) are declared for each grade in the usual fashion as they are not receiving continuous auditing. When a multiple declare has been awarded the pc is then, if so signed up, taken through the Power Processes and is declared at Grade V. Grade VA is also separately declared. Pcs who cannot be straightened out by Tech are of course sent to Qual as usual. No cross checking is done on the pc by the (c) of P or Qual for these lower grades as they are each one attained. This is up to the auditor. Lines remain otherwise unchanged. In a 25 hour auditing week, an HGC SH auditor is expected to get a minimum of 8 completions. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:pq.cden Copyright (c) 1966 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [Cancelled by HCO P/L 10 May 1970, Urgent-Important-Single Declare, page 98.] 83 NOT HCO POLICY LETTER CORRECT COLOUR FLASH BLUE ON WHITE EXECUTIVE DIRECTIVE ED 805 INT 11 January 1968 (Originally issued as Flag Order 340) SPEED OF SERVICE In the matter of courses and students SPEED of service is of vital importance. The prosperity of a business is directly proportional to the speed of flow of its particles (despatches, cables, goods, messengers, students, customers, agents, etc). To prosper, service must be as close to instant as possible. Anything which stops or delays the flows of a business or delays or puts a customer or product on WAIT is an enemy of that business. Good management carefully isolates all stops on its flow lines and eradicates them to increase speed of flows. . Speed of service is of comparable magnitude to quality of service and where exaggerated ideas of quality exist they must become secondary to speed. Only then can a business prosper. [seal] , "", 0 L . 0 0 L. RON HUBBARD Founder 8 ............. HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 FEBRUARY 1968 Remimeo ETHICS FAST FLOW AND ETHICS It is an actual fact by actual test that SOFT ETHICS IN COMBINATION WITH FAST FLOW GRADE AND CLASS ATTESTATION WILL COLLAPSE AN ORG. If false attestations are not met with savage ethics actions an area becomes filled up with people who have the overt of false attestation and whose natter kills sign ups. It is sometimes easier for a pc to falsely attest than to face his own bank. To escape, he falsely attests. If ethics action for such false attestation is soft, it encourages him to falsely attest as there is no real penalty. Where ethics action is savage, it is easier for him to face his bank and so he actually makes it. Only about 4 or 5% will falsely attest in the face of heavy ethics. This is no reason to hold up 95 or 96 people every hundred. Savage ethics such as a Condition of Liability enforced prevents the number from getting any larger than 4 or 5%. So don't go soft on ethics penalty for false attestations. LRH:adv.jp.cden.rd Copyright(c) 1968 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard Founder ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 84 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 24 FEBRUARY 1968 Gen Non-Remimeo SHSBC Students SH Tech & Qual Staff SH Foundation FAST FLOW FOR SHSBC STUDENTS' PRECLEARS Amends HCO Pol. Letter 30 Dec. 1966 1. The supreme policy being: RAPIDITY OF PARTICLE. FLOW ALONE DETERMINES POWER, it is imperative that the preclear, once the completion is reached, immediately continues the routing on lines and finishes the cycle he is on. 2. Therefore, any stops put forward by the insistence that a SHSBC Student's preclear should wait until the evening or even the week-end for the Declaration of his grade or grades on foundation lines, instead of day lines is a violation of the Fast Flow System and constitutes use of policy to stop a flow. 3. Therefore in future preclears are to be put on lines for declaration of a grade or grades without any delay on lines whatsoever. Blanka Annakin - Public Exec See SH Edie Hoyseth - Qual See SH Bene Neal - HCO Area See SH Monica Quirino - HCO Exec See SH Herbie Parkhouse - Org Exec See SH Ken Urquhart - LRH Comm SH Anne Tampion - D/HCO Exec See WW Allan Ferguson - Org Exec See WW Tony Dunleavy - Public Exec See WW Ken Delderfield - LRH Comm WW Joan McNocher - Dep Guardian WW LRH:jc.rd Mary Sue Hubbard - The Guardian WW Copyright 1968 for by L. Ron Hubbard L. RON HUBBARD ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Founder HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF I I MARCH 1968 Remimeo FALSE ATTESTATION For persons who have been found guilty at any time of a FALSE ATTESTATION - thereafter an attestation will never be accepted by anyone. There will only be an examination. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:jc.kd Founder Copyright (c) 1968 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 85 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 14 MARCH 1968 (Re-issued 8 May 1968) Remimeo POLICIES GOVERNING THE QUALIFICATIONS DIVISION FAST FLOW QUAL SEC - ORDERS 1. Get the Org Board changed immediately to read: Dept 13 C &A Dept 14 Review Dept 15 Exams Just change the depts, not the awareness levels. 2. If not available in the office, get within two (2) hours: a. for Exams: (1) one card file-metal preferably (2) 1000 cards for it-3" x 5" approx. b. for C & A: (1) 1 legal size file cabinet (2) 500 legal size folders (3) Hedger or log book c. for Qual: (1) get a stencil made immediately of each of the attached routing forms and have 100 run off each. 3. You no longer have an I & I Officer-re-assign to auditing if trained or to cover or help another Qual post. 4. Stars: Dept 13 C & A - awards given. Dept 14 Review - cash collected, and No. of completions. Dept 15 Exams - No. persons put back on lines. 5. Staff policy checkouts are done by attestation. Specific orders given to get star rate checkouts are done by Cramming Officer. A specific staff training schedule should be set up to train staff evenings. This to cover Staff Status check sheets and Org Exec Course. Out tech auditors get corrected in Cramming. 6. No staff training or staff review officer: troublesome staff go to Ethics. After their Ethics is in, stats up, then if they still need it they get a review at own expense. No disagreement checks. Instead get Ethics. Anyone sent for a disagreement check for natter, etc gets Ethics. If no trouble but wants a disagreement check, he gets a green form and disagreement process if necessary. No one tells Qual what to do and an Org is not a Clinic for staff members. 7. See the attached hats, forms, and outlines of Qual. 8. See that Academy gives R factor sheets to Students (will be published soon). 9. Make it go right. QUAL DIV AO Fast Flow is obtained by removing all unnecessary actions. For example, a routing form has a section for accounts on it, to pay for Review. However, pc paid for an hour in advance and didn't go over the hour-cross out the 86 accounts section and send him to the next point. Example: a guy comes from accounts going to C & A-the form has I & I on it-this is unnecessary, cross it out. He goes straight to C & A. So you have to evaluate whether or not the step is necessary to the action at hand. Qual never has a line up of PCs. You audit them fast. You may have to grab your C & A and send him to audit-the Qual See then covers his post. You may have to grab other staff. You may have to audit all night. Regardless, you keep the flow going. IF you are absolutely overwhelmed with PCs, and all available Auditors are auditing, send those waiting off to play in the grass, eat, see a movie, anything, but don't just keep them sitting there. May be Distribution has some mail to go out, etc. If you're sure it'll be a short wait, keep one or two nearby. Bodies sitting around are just solidifying beings. Don't let it happen. But don't misfigure and send them all out of reach so none can be gotten when you have an auditor free. You also push preference. All PCs pay for Qual in Advance if possible at all. Deposit fifty pounds at accounts toward Reviews. Pay for an hour at least. Pay for a day's Cramming in advance. And you don't accept this: Joe is nattery on his post and has disagreements, give him a disagreements check. Send this boy to Ethics. After he's been behaving and doing well he can have a Review if it's still necessary. Don't validate this jazz. Beat him on the head instead. And you never accept orders from anyone else-not in Qual. Bill needs an S & D-well all you know is someone thinks he needs an S & D-you do your Green Form with a yawn and find out what's really going on. QUAL SEC HAT 1. Purpose is to co-ordinate your three departments, remove all inspections before the fact, keep the flow up, and maintain Qual as the corrector of flat ball bearings. 2. If your Rev Dept runs out of auditors you can send your Dept heads to audit and you cover their post. 1 3. Your Dir Rev can call other Staff to help audit-like idle HGC auditors, etc. See FO 340 "Speed of Service". 4. Your stat is cash collected and No. of completions (Le. Rev & Cramming), 5. You assign department conditions quickly by stats. 6. You know the functions and purposes of every hat under you. 7. Attached are the hats of your 3 depts, your new routing forms, and a write up on Qual in general. 8. Routing forms-the terminal sending tells the router where to go with it. 9. Do a folder inspection each day and get your auditors' tech corrected all the time in Cramming-you instantly assign conditions for out tech. 10. See that memberships are removed from Qual-it is not correction -it is a dissem function. N.B. If Qual's stat going way up and Tech's is going down, evaluation and invalidation is likely occurring at C & A and Qual is not putting tech in and may well be getting up stats by having to do each Rev PC 2 or 3 times instead of handling him correctly the first time. DEPT 13 C & A HAT Handles all completions, gives certs, sells bracelets. Stat - awards given. 87 1. Keeps a log of all people who come through, recording date, what they completed, who attested that they completed. Log: DATE NAME AWARD ATTESTED 6 Jan 68 Joe Jones end Rev B. Bates & J.J. 6 Jan 68 John Johns Grd. 0 B. Bates & J.J. 6 Jan 68 Bill Bomes HCOB 2 Jan 67 B.B. 6 Jan 68 Mary Jab HRS theory D. Domb & M.J. Keeps PCs and students in same log. Clears in another log. OT grades in separate logs. 2. Receives a person : patter: a. Sends accounts invoice to Rev (if Rev PC or Cramm student). b. Gets attestation in duplicate. C. Files one copy in C & A fide. (c) Staples a copy on the form-behind it-the routing form. e. Fills in the log book with date, NAME AS THEY WANT IT ON THEIR CERT and who attested. f. Issues Cert as fast as possible. (1) Follows usual lines to get cert signed and issued-all attestations are accepted by HCO etc-no further inspection. (2) Only issues Cert if accounts Paid on the action. 3. Sends the person on to the Dir of Success or wherever indicated on the form. 4. The PC or student signs an attestation slip that he has completed, or can apply the data or has attained the grade. All attestations must be action attestations. Never one like "I've read the data and know it". Only, "I can apply (c) & A data to a PC", is acceptable for an attestation. 5. When the attestation is signed C & A files a copy in the person's file and staples a copy to the routing form. 6. C & A invoices that he has attested and staples a copy to the routing form. The attestation is written on the invoice by the Dir C & A (that's what 4 and 5 above are about). You don't have separate people doing this-no I & I etc-if it takes a long time someone has added something. If the routing form has an actual attestation on it-have him sign it-in this case you note on a chit that it's been signed, pc or student's name, what it was for, and the BR number. Then file the chit in his file. e.g. Jones, Bill 25/1/68 signed BR 36 for HCA Cert Course Joe Baines C&A Naturally if you have made up attestation forms, you would not do an invoice. You can use 2 pieces of paper and a carbon instead of invoice. One invoice goes to C & A file (5 above), and one is stapled to the back of the routing form -no more folders full of loose invoices-and make sure accounts staples invoices to forms where form says to. No paperclips. 7. C & A keeps a carbon and a piece of paper behind the log page-end of day it is sent to Exams. 8. This system obviously does away with ALL examinations-only attestations are used. 9. If the PC is not sure of the grade, GIs in, feels it's something, send him to the Examiner for a Minus Scale assessment and/or to find out if it's some other grade (HCO B 27 Sept 1965). 88 If it's not that, Exams sends to Review for correction. If Review finds tech goofs the auditor will then get assigned a Condition depending on the severity of the goof. If it is a minus scale or another grade, Exams returns to C & A to so attest and then back to the HGC. 10. Students bring their PCs in to C & A at the end of each release for attestation. 11. File all chits right away. Never leave until end of day. Your filing cabinet and stack of new folders is to be placed at your elbow where you can just reach over and file immediately. Always complete cycles of action. DEPT 14 - REVIEW - CORRECTS PEOPLE Stat - cash collected. 1. Receives PC and does standard Green Form-picks up each thing as it reads. 2. Ethics says do an S & D-Rev does a Green Form and finds it's a missed w/h-no S & (c) done. NO ONE TELLS QUAL WHAT TO DO-HCO says do a see check, Qual does a Green Form. Get the idea-NO ONE TELLS QUAL WHAT TO DO! NO ONE!! EVER! EVER!! EVER!!! 3. Review then sends him on when done. 4. If the guy has been sent to Review by Exams, is in Liability for False Attestation, Review's standard action is-Green Form, List-7, S & (c) type "W", "S", S & (c) Type "U", Rem A, Rem B-in that order. He gets them all-EVERY TIME-NO EXCEPTIONS. If he gets a FN on one S & (c) though, cease doing S & Ds. Then he goes to Accounts, pays for that and goes to Cramming where he gets-all the EM Drills star rate checked out, the Comm Course drills star rated, DMSMH & The Dian Course HCOB star rated, the CC materials star rated, and anything else Cramm cares to add (this is for a CC student-you'd change the CC material for someone else and perhaps the L-7); never change the order. The S & Ds in this case are done at regular Review rates. To Ethics after the S & Ds to disconnect naturally (unless ended on a FN and he's not been declared PTS). See the long routing form for the section where a guy comes out of Review headed for Ethics-in this case though, C & A would do all steps. 5. Such a person came from Exams where his folder was gone over, his out tech chitted, and where he was sent to Ethics, then Rev. Ethics has him for 5 mins and that is ALL-no long lines outside Ethics either. Before he gets to Review his Ethics Order should be coming off the presses-it must be fast-a week old Ethics order, even one a couple hours old, may be too late-he could be up scale a few conditions by then. Speed is what counts. One student here went from Liability to Clear in about 48 hours. 6. Cramming: a. is TOUGH, b. is the only place in the OR G where star rate check outs are done, C. if Ethics has someone confused about Conditions, he goes to Cramming (by the way, Ethics should have a stack of Conditions policies to hand people), (c) staff gets Crammed at staff rates if they need it. No special sections for staff. N.B. on S & Lis: If Qual finds he needs S & (c) just use the provision in the Rev Routing Form. If ends on FN no need to see Ethics. If item found send to Ethics for disconnection. However, if Ethics sent him for S & (c) and Qual found he did need one and so gave one, he goes back to Ethics whether ended with FN or an item so that PTS order can be cancelled. 7. Dir Rev constantly checks Rev folders for out tech-daily-and sees that it gets corrected immediately in Cramming. 89 DEPT 15 EXAMS Handles those who have goofed. Stat - No. people put back on lines. I - He's like a second Ethics Officer. You don't want to wind up in his hands. 2. He keeps a card file of names. The Reg sends him a list of names each day of everyone who signed up for something and what it was-the Reg does this simply by placing a carbon and a piece of paper behind the log page-end of day it's sent to Exams. 3. The daily list from C & A and from the Reg is recorded in the card file. E.g. of a card: Blow, Joe signed for: Grd 0 2 Jan '68 (done 5 Jan) Liability 3 Jan Rev (done 4 Jan) Grd 1 6 Jan (done 6 Jan) Follow this form exactly, anything completed goes in parenthesis. N.B. This PC you'll therefore note is not yet in Normal Operation and hasn't signed for Grd 2. 4. About 5 pm each day, Exams goes to Tech and goes through their files to find who hasn't sent in their auditing slips-doesn't apply to outer orgs. Each person he finds he sends a Summons to-failure to report to an examiner results in an assignment of the Condition of DOUBT. 5. When he appears the Examiner goes through his folder-out tech is chitted, the PC sent to Ethics right then, then to Accounts, then to Review-you do only ONE copy of the chit-it goes with the folder-you don't want CC and OT chits floating around and in comm baskets. You don't care how long Exams hangs the guy up in Review-Exams says he gets Level "0" star rated, that's it, he gets it. If he got to the Examiner, then that's it-he gets the works. 6. If business is slow, Exams starts picking up the PCs who checked the "POOR" box on their slips and sends them a Summons - doesn't apply to outer orgs. 7. Exams gleans its card file often, looking for who finished something and then didn't take the next step. Looking for who signed for, but never finished. These all get Summonses. Once in a blue moon Exams gets someone who is okay-Exams just lots them go-but this situation is rare. Supervisors send students to Exams who clean cleans on themselves, have lousy indicators, want Cramming, want a written exam to prove they know it (indicates uncertainty, so something is out). Supers watch for these things. As soon as a Condition formula has been applied and effected, the PC, student, or staff member applies for an upgrade to whomever assigned the condition. Naturally, if Review actions are incomplete, he couldn't be in Normal Operation as not all is corrected yet. Supers' guide is, is the student learning and becoming certain of his data, not his time on course-there no longer are any time limits for courses. Supers see these things. They do not inspect before the fact. They watch. indicators. If a student bogs down he goes to the Examiner who probably sends to Review and Cramming (probably needs Rem A & B, perhaps an S & (c) & Cramming). Super attests on check sheet that the check sheet is complete and up to date when the student gets it. 8. If Qual's stats are down, Exams isn't doing its job. 9. Exams is after the dirt. Who falsely attested? Who said he could do and then botched it up? Exams is an inspector AFTER the fact of something going wrong. Qual NEVER inspects before the fact of something going wrong. 90 Exams looks for the student who got his CC materials but who has yet to attest that he can apply them-send him a Summons-probably needs an S & (c) or Cramming or Rem A & B, or all of these. Exams sends to Review to determine for sure on the S & D-but this one is paid for, $100, even though done in Review. 10. Exams can issue a Summons to anyone found off the Road-like dead files. Qual's job is to get tech in fast-fast correction and thorough-and complete. 11. See the C & A hat re PCs who come to you for minus scales, etc. 12. PCs or students all confused about conditions-send to Cramming. 13. Get co-ordinated with the ARC Break Reg so that you aren't issuing summonses to those people. However, if she gets no response, she sends you the folder and you issue a Summons. Lt. Fred Payer FP:adv.je.rd Sea Org Copyright (c) 1968 for by L. Ron Hubbard L. RON HUBBARD ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Founder [Cancelled by HCO P/L 13 December 1968, page 93; added to by HCO P/L 28 January 1969, page 94; and also cancelled by HCO P/L 23 May 1970, page 101. See also 6 April 1970 Issue II, page 96.1 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 15 MAY 1968 Remimeo (Additions to HCO Policy Letter of 14 March 1968 reissued 8 May 1968, "Policies Governing the Qualifications Division") Refer Page 87, point 4, Qual Sec Hat. As per ED 935 INT, the GDS Qual Stat is dual stat- . Gross Income of the Org divided by the number of persons on staff. 2. Cash collected by reason of the Division and No. of Completions. Refer Page 88, point 9, C & A Hat. HCO Bulletin 2nd January 1967 "Examiner's Safeguard" is to be used as well. This is in the case of pc not being sure of the grade, GIs in, feels it's something, send him to the Examiner for a Minus Scale Assessment and/or to find out if it's some other grade (HCO B 27th Sept 1965). HCO B "Examiner's Safeguard" should be brought to the attention of students on Level 0, HRS Checksheet. Note that S & Ds are now part of the Level IV HAA as per l4th Mar 68 HCO Pol Ltr. Refer Page 89, point 6, Dept Review. On LRH instructions the Staff Training Officer is to be reinstated immediately. Staff members required to attest on Policy should be required to demonstrate, not just attest. It is a must for people who have a history of false attestation. On the Interneship and SHSBC checkouts as per HCO Policy Ltr 4 Oct 67 "Theory Checkout Data" using twin system and clay table demonstrations on HCO Bulletins marked star rated is to be employed. Allan Ferguson Org Exec See WW Ken Delderfiald LRH Comm WW Joan McNocher Dep/Guardian WW LRH:js.rd Mary Sue Hubbard Copyright (c) 1968 The Guardian WW by L. Ron Hubbard for ALL RIGHTS RESERVED L. RON HUBBARD [Cancelled by HCO P/L 23 May 1970, page 101.1 Founder 91 NOT HCO POLICY LETTER CORRECT COLOUR FLASH BLUE ON WHITE EXECUTIVE DIRECTIVE FROM L. RON HUBBARD LRH ED 29 WW 16 SH I EU I US I August 1968 CANCEL ATTESTATION ON UK AND US SHSBC AND REVERT TO EXAMINA TION. LIKEWISE ON ALL ACADEMY STUDENTS IN UK. GET IN TRS AND EXACT GRADE PROCESS. RETRAIN ALL WHO FLUB OR GET ETHICS RECORDS PRIOR TO THIS DATE. YOUR PROGRAM: GET AUDITORS GET RESULTS GET UP STATS. LOVE RON, [seal] ............. L. RON HUBBARD Founder (c) 01082R [Cancelled by LRH ED 82 INT and HCO P/L 3 September 1969, page 95.1 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 SEPTEMBER 1968 Remimeo REVIEW COMPLETE PC ATTESTATIONS The following sign is to be placed up in every auditing room and every Qual in the world IF YOU FEEL YOUR REVIEW IS COMPLETE YOU MAY GO TO CERTS & AWARDS AND ATTEST THAT IT IS AND ATTAIN AUTHORITY TO GO BACK ON COURSE OR TO THE HGC. It is illegal for an auditor to tell a PC to attest. It comes under the heading of evaluation. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:mps.ei.rd Copyright (c) 1968 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 92 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 13 DECEMBER 1968 Remimeo CANCELLATION HCO Policy Letter of 14 March 1968, Policies Governing the Qualifications Division is hereby cancelled as it violates the purpose of the Qualifications Division which is: TO ENSURE THE RESULTS OF SCIENTOLOGY, CORRECT THEM WHEN NECESSARY AND ATTEST TO THEM WHEN ATTAINED. Qual is to revert to its original org board formation prior to the issuance of the above Policy Letter, in other words: Dept 13 Exams - contains I & I Officer Dept 14 Review - includes Staff Review Officer and Staff Training Officer Dept 15 Certs & Awards - contains memberships. All routing forms are to be changed as necessary. Philip Quirino Tech & Qual Aide LRH:PQ:Idm.ei.rd for Copyright (c) 1968 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard Founder ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [Cancelled by HCO Policy Letter of 23 may 1970 in this section.] HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 17 JANUARY 1969 Remimeo PC ATTESTATIONS (Covers pcs and pre-OTs) Although the right of a preclear to attest completion may not be denied him, it is still ultimately the Case Supervisor who says whether or not the case is complete. This appertains QUAL DIV pcs and pre-OTs. It was found conclusively that no matter how good and radiant and great the pc feels, and how fantastic the indicators are even at the examiner's desk, the pc will come to grief when out tech has occurred. A large number of pcs and pre-OTs attested complete whilst the Case Supervisor detected out tech in their sessioning. As they had been audited by Class VIIIs with excellent TRs, good indicators and meter phenomena were in, and remained in, on some cases for several days even, but sooner or later the case was found in Ethics or medical or post trouble, or a combination of all of these. So let him attest complete all he wants, but the CIS decides, And this is done solely on what he sees in the folder. NOTHING ELSE unless he requires additional data for which lines exist. Tech is far too deadly in its accuracy to let any pc out of Qual whilst knowing there is out tech on the case. This is not invalidation of pcs, as releasing them from Qual with technical outness constitutes the validation of a lie. Auditing is too precise and accepts only the STANDARD in application and result. Lt. O.J. Roos LRH:OJR:Idm.ei.rd Flag C/S Copyright (c) 1969 for by L. Ron Hubbard L. RON HUBBARD ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Founder 93 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 28 JANUARY 1969 Remimeo Addition to HCO Policy Letter of 14 March, 1968 POLICIES GOVERNING THE QUALIFICATIONS DIVISION-FAST FLOW As attestation is now back in, Students are not required to be checked out by another person on star-rated materials. They do however, have to attest that they know these materials in every detail. It is safe however to get someone to work with you on it to be sure you do know it. The following statement is to be added to the forms that are already filled out at each level: "I also attest that I have studied all the star-rated materials for this level and I know them in every detail." This does not apply to Class VIII materials or Power Processes. Irene Dunleavy LRH:ID:sdp.ei.cden CS-5 Copyright (c) 1969 for by L. Ron Hubbard L. RON HUBBARD ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Founder [Cancelled by HCO P/Ls 22 July 1969, Past Flow Training, below, 23 May 1970, Cancellation of Policies Governing the Qualifications Division-Fast Flow, page 101, and 29 July 1972 Issue II, Fast Flow in Training, in the 1972 Year Book.] HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 22 JULY 1969 (Cancels HCO POLICY LETTER OF 28 JAN 1969) Remimeo FAST FLOW TRAINING Although Academy and Briefing Courses are taught on a fast flow basis with no examinations, students must apply HCO P/L 26 Aug 65, "SCIENTOLOGY TRAINING TWIN CHECKOUTS" on all star-rated materials of their level. W/O Ira Chaleff LRH:IC:nt.ei.cden.rd Chief Officer AO INT Copyright (~) 1969 for by L. Ron Hubbard L. RON HUBBARD ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Founder [Cancelled by HCO P/L 29 July 1972 Issue II, Past Flow in Training, in the 1972 Year Book.] 94 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 3 SEPTEMBER 1969 Remimeo (LRH ED 82 INT - 20 January 1969 Qual Sec Hat Issued as a Policy Letter) Tech Sec Hat Dept 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 Hats C/S Hats ATTESTATION REINSTATED ATTESTATION OF ALL CLASSES (EXCEPT VIII) AND GRADES IS REESTABLISHED. ED 29WW 16SH 1EU 1US which cancelled attestation on SHSBC and any ED cancelling attestation is revoked. HCO Pol Ltr 14 March 68 FAST FLOW and HCO Pol Ltr 29 Mar 65, Issue II, HCO Pol Ltrs 6 Feb 68 and 7 Feb 68 and HCO Pol Ltr 24 Feb 68 are returned to force in all courses, Academies, and SHSBC (but not Class VIII). A programme which placed Class VIIIs in every org to safeguard tech has now been completed and Class VIlIs are graduating regularly from Advanced Orgs. This will keep tech in and effective. A few auditing errors which came out of FAST FLOW made it necessary to safeguard tech application. This has now been done fully and completely. FAST FLOW means the student attests his theory or practical class when he believes he has covered the materials and can do it. There is no. examination. The student's own attestation is accepted and he is certified. If he has made a false attestation it shows up in his auditing. However, he will not now be ordered to retrain if he errs in his auditing. He will be fined as an Ethics matter. The fine will be proportionate to the cost of the auditing done incorrectly. This is effective at once. HCO Pol Ltr 14 Mar 68 must be gotten in in Qual Divisions over the world. With SO VIIIs on the job over the world tech will be safeguarded. With the Class VIII Course now being given in Advanced Orgs, any defects can be remedied. Only about 8% of those trained made it slow for the 92%. Thus the speed of training is now fully up to the student. It has also been found that examinations serve as invalidation and that only invalidation knocks an auditor off his stride. I am sorry for any inconvenience or slow this temporary suspension of Fast Flow may have brought about. The first release of the new non-examination system was a test. It was withdrawn and any holes in it patched up. Fast Flow on training as well as auditing is now fully and permanently released. It was not suspended on grades or auditing. It is now restored to training. Class VIII was a great break through in auditing. It pushed results to 100%. With Class VIIIs around the simplicity and directness of auditing is in full view and results will be higher than ever before. Note: This does not alter HCO Pol Ltr 5 May 1969, Issue II, Dianetic Course Examinations. Re-issue from LRH ED 82 INT Proposed by Leif Windle, D/Policy Safeguard Chief WW and Zena Herring, Policy Safeguard Chief AF Approved by Kevin Kember, A/Policy Safeguard Chief WW for Jane Kember, The Guardian WW for LRH:LW:ZH:ei.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright (c) 1969 Founder by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 95 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 6 APRIL 1970 Issue II Remimeo (Replaces Grade Attestation forms OES of HCO P/L 14 March 1968 "Policies Qual Sec C&A Governing the Qualifications Division") SCIENTOLOGY RELEASE ATTESTATION FORM The following is the form to be used for attestation to Scientology Grades of Release; single and triple. Use the form per HCO P/L 14 March 1968 "Policies Governing the Qualifications Division". This form should be printed and used as one form kept in the preclear's folder (a copy goes to CF). If the pc is not attesting to all single or triple grades, have him initial the ones that apply and sign the final statement. ATTESTATION OF RELEASE 1, , do hereby attest with my initials and signature below, that I am satisfied that I have achieved release on the following grades. I further understand that it is a violation of the ethical codes of Scientology to falsely attest, or falsely fail to attest, to any state achieved. SINGLE GRADES Initial & Date GRADE 0, COMMUNICATION: I have achieved in auditing the ability to communicate freely to anyone on any subject. GRADE 1, PROBLEMS: Through processing I have made to vanish current problems in life, and have the ability to recognize the source of problems and make them vanish. GRADE II, RELIEF: Through processing I have attained relief from feelings of guilt or regret about past actions of mine, and do not feel I must keep secret anything that has happened. GRADE 111, FREEDOM: I have discovered through auditing the source of past upsets and now understand and feel free of such upsets. GRADE IV, ABILITY: I have discovered in auditing, and been released from, fixed and destructive patterns of action of mine. I now feel free to do new things. TRIPLE GRADES STRAIGHTWIRE: I have achieved in auditing a new understanding of and confidence about, recalling things. SECONDARIES: Through auditing, I have re-experienced and been relieved of, incidents from the past containing loss and painful emotion. ENGRAMS: Through auditing, I have re-experienced and been relieved of, incidents from the past containing physical pain and unconsciousness. 96 GRADE 0, COMMUNICATION: I have achieved in auditing the ability to communicate freely to anyone on any subject, and can accept others communicating on any subject. GRADE 1, PROBLEMS: I have made to vanish current problems in life and with others through processing, and now feel confident about handling problems in general. GRADE 11, RELIEF: Through processing, I have attained relief from feelings of guilt or regret about past actions of mine, and do not feel that I must keep secret anything that has happened. I have discovered people are responsible for the condition they are in. GRADE 111, FREEDOM: I have discovered through auditing the source of past upsets with myself and others, and now understand and feel free of all such upsets. GRADE IV, ABILITY: I have discovered in auditing, and been released from, fixed and destructive patterns of action of mine and others. I now feel free to do new things. Having completed the Grades of Release initialed above, I hereby state unreservedly and without influence or duress that I have achieved the gains and spiritual betterment I expected from Dianetics and Scientology pastoral counselling. As a testimony of satisfaction, I waive any future claim for refund of offerings made for such services. Preclear signature Date Witness, C & A Auditor's name Craig Beeney, D/G Tech US for Robert H. Thomas, D/G US for Jane Kember, Guardian WW for Mary Sue Hubbard, CS-G for L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:MSH:JK:RHT:CB:kjm.ei.rd Copyright (c) 1970 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED (See reference to this Pol Ltr in LR14 ED 103 INT, 21 May 1970, Past Flow Grades Cancelled, page 99.] [Cancelled by HCO P/L 25 June 1970 (revised & reissued 17 July 1970), Expanded Lower GradesChart of Abilities Gained and Inabilities Lost, page 159.] 97 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 10 MAY 1970 Remimeo ALL TECH AND QUAL URGENT HATS IMPORTANT SINGLE DECLARE Multiple Declare Cancelled (This cancels HCO PL 6 Aug 1966, Declare, Multiple, which permitted a pc to be run from Grade 0 to IV and declare them all at once.) Policy: Only one grade of auditing may be declared or attested to at one time. Many pcs have been found not to have attained the End Phenomena of each lower grade as per both the 1966 and 1968 Classification Charts. Unless a pc directly attests the end phenomena to an Examiner the Grade cannot be awarded and the pc may not proceed. The examiner is permitted to ask the end phenomena question for that grade. If the pc cannot attest he has attained it, he must be returned to session to have the process completed, additional processes of that grade run. The Triple Grade and its havingness is run. There are many other processes for each grade which help attain that End Phenomena. The condition has arisen where the lower grades have become slighted in orgs and the pc is not being set up well for a stable gain. For instance Grade III can be repeated a dozen times. The CCHs and others listed on the "Process Taught" Training Column of the 1966 and 1968 Classifications Chart have become neglected YET ARE ALL VALID FOR THAT GRADE AND SHOULD ALL BE RUN, FOR A GRADE. The Abilities Attained Column, Processing section of the 1966 and 1968 Classification Chart give the question that must be answered positively before the pc is let have the Grade or to have further grades. The huge version of the Classification Chart should be republished in a huge format modified in text only as it extends upwards into OT grades. These Classification Charts, particularly the Column under Training "Processes Taught" and under Processing "Abilities Attained" are valid. "Processes Taught" should also appear as "Processes Used" under the Processing side. Other Class VI Processes may also be used to attain these abilities. IT IS POSSIBLE TO HAVE SEVERAL F/Ns PER GRADE. It is Policy NOT to downgrade Scientology lower grades just for the sake of speed and Admin flows. TRs (0 to 9) are curing some drug addicts. They belong before Dianetics. Probably the main trouble orgs have had recently has come from tossing aside all Lower Grades. Thus the route to Total Freedom became impeded. The Multiple Declare PL and any other advice from anyone permitting pcs to escape direct attestation of lower grades and Power are NOT VALID AND ARE CANCELLED. You will note that even the Multiple Declare PL (6 Aug 66) was SH Only and was intended only for rehabilitation of already run grades so Power could be run. DON'T DOWNGRADE LOWER GRADES. LRH:nt.rw.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright ~~- 1970 Founder bW by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 98 NOT HCO POLICY LETTER CORRECT COLOUR FLASH BLUE ON WHITE EXECUTIVE DIRECTIVE FROM L. RON HUBBARD LRH ED 103 INT Date 21 May 1970 To: All staff OES Tech See Qual See All Org Auditors Class VIlls C/Ses From: Ron Subject: FAST FLOW GRADES CANCELLED Reference: HCO PL 10 May 70 A large number of HCO PLs and HCO Bs are being cancelled. The HGC has been permitted to slip into Qual. Lower grades have become unmocked with the result that lower grade results ARE NOT BEING ATTAINED. The effect is actually throwing away Scientology. These lower grades have MANY PROCESSES. EACH GRADE HAS MANY PROCESSES. If you wonder what happened to income, what happened to your field it is just this: The HGC slipped into Qual, people ceased to gain the Ability required of each lower grade, Scientology was no longer being delivered in full. Every process of the "trained in" Column of the 1968 Classification Chart IS USED. In particular, HCO Pol Ltr 14 March 1968 "Policies Governing the Qualifications Division. Fast Flow" is cancelled. The Qual Org Board reverts to HCO PL 2 Nov 67. Dept 13 is Examinations, Dept 14 is Review, Dept 15 is Certs and Awards. A pc completing ONE lower grade must go to the Examiner who asks him the question contained in HCO PL 6 April 1970 for each grade. This attest form itself is not valid. But the questions for the grade are taken from an old SH booklet on grades. This gives you a ready source for the Examiner's question. All three flows of a triple grade and its havingness can be run as THE LAST ACTION OF THE GRADE. It should only be done after the pc has had any other processes listed for that grade. C/S The C/S operates now in Div IV the Tech Div, Dept 12. Any EDs or PLs or HCO Bs requiring otherwise are being cancelled. HGC The HGC holds onto its pcs, setting up a case, correcting outnesses in auditing a process. "To Review" is a misused and abused term. An HGC auditor can certainly handle a chain that wasn't finished in last session. ONLY WHEN THE DIV IV C/S OR TECH SEC OR (c) OF P GIVES UP ON A CASE DOES IT GO TO REVIEW. REVIEW There is no C/S in Qual. A Review auditor looks over the folder and the case, finds out what hasn't been or needs handling and puts the case back together again. The Review auditor never does major actions. These are done in the HGC. Internes can be trained in Qual but they audit in the HGC. EXAMINER AND GRADE DECLARES The Examiner can put the pc on a meter, can give the pc the end phenomena of the grade he is there to declare in print or ask it and ask if he has attained it. IF THERE IS ANY DOUBT IN THE PC'S MIND OR IF THE METER IS POOR OR BAD INDICATORS ARE PRESENT the Examiner sends the pc back to the HGC! 99 The pc is usually accompanied to the Examiner by the Auditor and brings the pc's folder. The Examiner can look at the folder to see what was run and COMPARE it to THE 1968 CLASS CHART COLUMN "TRAINED IN". If the pc has had very little auditing on the grade (such as just a single flow of the grade process) the examiner would do well not to ask the pc anything but send the pc and auditor back to the HGC. Procedure would be (a) pc and his auditor go to Examiner; (b) Examiner looks at the folder to see if it is okay and enough auditing (the "Trained in" processes) done for the grade; (c) Examiner sends them back to HGC if he won't examine; or (c) puts pc on cans; (e) notes meter OK; (f) asks or shows the end question for the grade; (g) if pc says no it is back to the HGC, if pc says yes it's on to Certs and Awards. After every session there is also an examination as per current policy and the Exam report goes in the folder as has been done. It is the declare exam for a grade that has reverted to '66 exam procedure and which is given above. THE EXAMINER REFUSES TO EXAMINE ANY TWO OR MORE GRADES AT A TIME. POWER EACH POWER PROCESS IN V IS SEPARATELY EXAMINED. STUDENTS This doesn't change students but they still must attest. LEVELS NOT DESCRIBED Any level not described on the '68 Classification Chart still requires that the pc or Pre OT declare it and that all folders show he made it. CANCELLED PLs, ETC The full list of cancellations will be issued in PL form, HCO Bs, EDs and VIII materials are all being corrected. This will be issued shortly. It is a considerable emergency that this Ed be gotten into effect at once! SO Missions and other data sources show that when we ceased to require all grade processes be run and ceased to examine each grade for ability attained we threw away 90% of Scientology. I have been looking for a long time to find why Class IV orgs found so little to sell, so little to audit and why they were doing so badly. This is it. Scn orgs are service organisations. When they cease to give full service and full gains they have trouble. Therefore this Ed is being sent to you swiftly. Follow what I've given you. Pry Tech and Qual Divs apart with a crowbar. Begin to produce in your Production Division. PURPOSE OF QUAL HCO PL 9 Jul 65 "There's no reason to start running intensives in Qual". HCO PL 31 Jul 65 "Review must take over any non-optimum product". HCO PL 20 Nov 65 No. 77 "Quickly repairs any flat ball bearing". HCO PL I Feb 66 Dir Rev repair of goofs. . . In short we're back to original policy. The basic structure got varied and the subject got lost. That's the motto of this Ed. Good luck and high stats. -------------------------------------------------------------------- .. ...... . L. RON HUBBARD Founder *C ... .. 100 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex - HCO POLICY LETTER OF 23 MAY 1970 Remimeo CANCELLATION OF POLICIES GOVERNING THE QUALIFICATIONS DIVISION - FAST FLOW With reference to LRH ED 103 INT, 21 May, '70: FAST FLOW GRADES CANCELLED, the following HCO PLs are cancelled: 4 May 65 Release Award 14 Mar 68 Policies Governing the Qualifications Division-Fast Flow 14 Mar 68 Re-issued 8 May 68 Policies Governing the Qualifications Division -Fast Flow 15 May 68 Additions to HCO PL 14 Mar 68 13 Dec 68 Cancellation 28 Jan 69 Additions to HCO PL 14 Mar 68 James Fuller D/CS-5 for L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:JF:dz.ka.rd Copyright (c) 1970 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 101 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 20 OCTOBER 1967 Remimeo All Qual Hats All Tech Hats Org Exec Course THE LINES OF THE QUALIFICATIONS DIVISION THE INTERVIEW INVOICE SECTION This Section is handled by the Qualifications Interview-Invoice In-Charge. All bodies coming into the Qualifications Division are routed through this section, and in some cases bodies leaving the Qualifications Division are routed through this section. A body cannot arrive at any point in the Qualifications Division without first having been routed and invoiced to that point by the Qualifications Interview-Invoice InCharge. The Qualifications Interview-Invoice In-Charge interviews the student, preclear, or staff member in order. to decide what routing is necessary. The interview is extremely short and direct to the purpose of getting only sufficient information in order to make a decision concerning the proper routing. Once the proper routing is ascertained the student, preclear, or staff member is invoiced into the Qualifications Division by writing an invoice stating the date, time, and the Department and Section to be routed to, and getting the person to sign the invoice. Routing A. STUDENT ROUTINGS 1. A student applicant for certification A student applicant for certification is routed to the Certification Examiner in the student Examinations Section of the Department of Examinations. In order to be so routed the student must present to the Qualifications Interview-Invoice InCharge his completed check-sheets showing that all theory checkouts have been completed for the Level for which certification is being requested. 2. A student who failed certification A student who did not pass his certification E-Meter check is routed back to the Qualifications Interview-Invoice In-Charge by the Certification Examiner and is then routed by the Qualifications Interview-Invoice In-Charge by invoice and routing form to the Case Section of the Department of Review where a case review is given the student. When the review has been completed, the student is routed back to the Qualifications Interview-Invoice In-Charge. At this point, the Qualifications Interview-Invoice In-Charge routes the student to the Area Cashier Section of the Department of Income to pay for the auditing done and to report back to present the proper invoices of the Income Section and be invoiced out of the Qualifications Division. The final action is to route the student to the Ethics Section of the Department of Inspections and Reports. 3. A student applicant for classification A student applicant for classification is routed by invoice and routing form to the Classification Examiner in the student Examinations Section of the Department of Examinations. In order to be so routed the student must present completed practical checksheets and the auditing folder or folders of preclears he or she has audited for the Level at which classification is requested. 4. A student who failed classification A student who failed the classification examination is routed back to the Qualifications Interview-Invoice In-Charge by the Classification Examiner and is then routed by the Qualifications Interview-Invoice In-Charge by invoice and routing form 102 either to the Case Section of the Department of Review or to the Cramming Section of the Department of Review depending on whether the student is in need of a review or not. If the student is in need of review, the Qualifications Interview-Invoice III-Charge routes by invoice and routing form for an assist in the Case Section of the Department of Review. When the assist has been completed, the student is routed by the Case Officer back to the Qualifications Interview-Invoice In-Charge, who routes the student to the Area Cashier Section of the Department of Income to pay for the auditing done and to then report back to the Qualifications Interview-Invoice In-Charge to present the proper invoices of the Income Section in order to be invoiced out of the Department of Review Case Section and invoiced and routed to the Cramming Section. If the student does not need review, the student is invoiced into and routed to the Department of Review, Cramming Section. The student remains in the Cramming Section until such time as he can pass the classification examination. Although he may present himself several times for re-examination and is routed by the Qualifications Interview-Invoice InCharge to the Classification Examiner, the student is only out of the Cramming Section when the classification examination is passed. In such cases the student is invoiced into the student Examinations Section, but not invoiced out of the Cramming Section of the Department of Review. When the student passes his classification examination at last, he is routed to the Qualifications Interview-Invoice Section from which he is routed to the Area Cashier Section of the Department of Income to pay for the number of days spent in the Cramming Section and to then report back to the Qualifications Interview-Invoice In-Charge in order to present the proper invoices of the Income Section and to be invoiced out of the Qualifications Division. 5. A student with difficulties Any student with difficulties routed by the Technical Division to the Qualifications Division, such as a slow student (getting an insufficient number of passes per week), an assist or an ARC break, is routed by the Qualifications Interview-Invoice In-Charge by invoice and routing form to the Department of Review, Case Section. After the case review has been completed the student is routed back to the Qualifications Interview-Invoice In-Charge with the folder containing the reports of the auditing. The folder is investigated to see if it is necessary to send the student to Ethics. In any case the student is routed to the Area Cashier Section of the Department of Income to pay for the review. After paying for the review, the student is routed back by the Area Cashier Section to be invoiced out of the Qualifications Division by the Qualifications Interview-Invoice In-Charge upon the presentation of the proper invoices from the Area Cashier Section of the Department of Income. Now if any ethics action is necessary, the Qualifications Interview-Invoice In-Charge routes the student to the Ethics Section of the Department of Inspections and Reports. 6. A student applicant for gradation A student applicant for gradation is routed by invoice and routing form to the student Examinations Section in the Department of Examinations. B. HGC PRECLEAR ROUTINGS 1. -An HGC preclear for review An HGC preclear for review is either routed to the Qualifications Interview Invoice Section by the auditor or is routed there by the Case Supervisor via the HGC Administrator. There are certain symbols used by the Case Supervisor to indicate what action is necessary in the Case Section of the Department of Review. REY ' ? ' REY FL?' and ETH? are all invoiced and routed by routing form to the Case Section of the Department of Review, along with the preclear's folder. When the review auditing is completed the preclear is routed back to the Qualifications Interview-Invoice In-Charge to be routed to the Area Cashier Section of the Department of Income to handle the billing for the review auditing. The Area Cashier Section of the Department of Income routes the preclear back with the proper invoices to be invoiced out of the Qualifications Division by the Qualifications Interview-Invoice In-Charge and the HGC Administrator immediately notified that the review action on the preclear has been completed. 103 2. An HGC preclear for Release Declaration An HGC preclear routed to the Qualifications Interview Invoice In-Charge for Release Declaration is invoiced to and routed by routing form to HGC Pc Examiner in the Examinations Section of the Department of Examinations. If the HGC Pc Examiner sees that the preclear is not all right or the folder is a mess, the preclear is routed back to the Qualifications Interview-Invoice In-Charge for invoicing and routing to the Case Section in the Department of Review. When the review is completed, the preclear is routed back to the Qualifications Interview-Invoice Section, thence to the Area Cashier Section in the Department of Income, back to the Qualifications Interview-Invoice InCharge with the proper invoices to be invoiced out of the Qualifications Division either back to the HGC for further auditing or out through the Department of Certificates and Awards if released in Review. If the preclear was all right, he would be routed by invoice to the Department of Certificates and Awards for Grade Certificate or Declaration of Release. The symbol used for the grade or Release declaration routing by the Case Supervisor via the HGC Administrator is DECLARE? C. STAFF MEMBER R OUTINGS A staff member, if not an HGC preclear, is routed as follows: 1. A staff member for Staff Status examination A staff member for a Staff Status examination is routed to the Staff Training Unit in the staff section of the Department of Examinations via invoice and routing form. 2. A staff member for policy or bulletin checkout is routed via invoice to the Staff Training Unit in the staff section of the Department of Review. Routings Out of the Qualifications Division Staff, students, and preclears are routed out of the Qualifications Division via the Department of Certificates and Awards for the following: 1. Students passed for certification 2. Students passed for classification 3. Preclears passed for Declaration of Release 4. Staff members passed for Staff Status Ratings 5. Student preclears passed for Declaration of Release. All students and preclears are routed out of the Qualifications Division via the Department of Examinations, Qualifications Interview-Invoice Section for the following: 1. Students failed for certification after having been handled by review auditing in the Case Section of the Department of Review. 2. Students failed for classification after having been in cases of upset, handled by the Case Section for review and in all cases having been handled in the Cramming Section by passing the classification Examination. 3. Students with difficulties after having been handled by review in the Case Section. 4. HGC preclears sent to the Case Section of the Department of Review after having had their cases reviewed. 5. Student preclears sent to the Case Section of the Department of Review after having had their cases reviewed. In all of the five categories routed out of the Qualifications Division through the Qualifications Interview-Invoice In-Charge with the exception of students who failed gradation, routing is done in this fashion to insure that the student or preclear is routed in all cases to the Area Cashier Section of the Department of Income to pay for the services delivered by the Qualifications Division and then to route further, if need be, to the Ethics Section of the Department of Inspections and Reports. Staff members who fail Staff Status examinations or who pass or fail bulletin or policy letter checkouts merely return to their posts or are routed to the Staff Review Officer, depending upon their study record. 104 Page System Students and preclears are routed to the Qualifications Division by Pages in the Department of Technical Services. This is done as no student or preclear is permitted to carry or bring folders or files of their own. The Qualifications Division may have a Page of its own for routings out of the Division or for internal routing. The preclear folders as brought by the Page are put on the desk of the Qualifications Interview-Invoice In-Charge. Each folder newly brought in is placed on the bottom of the stack of folders on the desk. The Qualifications Interview-Invoice In-Charge merely makes sure that for every preclear brought in to be interviewed and invoiced has a folder brought over by a Page, and that the folder is placed on the bottom of the stack of preclears to be sent to the Case Section of the Department of Review. Keeping The Lines Flowing The Qualifications Interview-Invoice In-Charge is to keep the lines moving. By this is meant that the people should be routed as fast as possible to the correct destination. If there is any delay in service due to the personnel on that post to which the person is to be routed, the student, preclear, or staff member should be advised that there will be a delay and asked to wait or make themselves available for service. The whole idea is to handle the traffic that is there to be handled and to route these people to the proper service as fast as possible. If there does seem to be more delay than necessary, the Qualifications Interview-Invoice In-Charge should advise the Qualifications Secretary so that steps can be taken to put on personnel in order to keep the people moving on the lines and the service performed. Invoicing A. WRITING AN INVOICE In invoicing the student, preclear, or staff member into the Qualifications Division, the following information is clearly written on the invoice: 1. The person's name 2. The date and time of day 3. The Department and Section or Unit to which the person is routed. There is no need to write the purpose of what is required to be done as the department, section or unit clearly defines what the purpose is. B. ROUTING OF INVOICE COPIES There are three ' copies and one original of any invoice written. These are routed as follows: I . The original and two copies are given to. the individual to present to the Officer of the section or unit to which the person is routed. 2. The last invoice remains in the machine. The Officer in charge of the section or unit to which the individual has been routed will return the yellow invoice to the Qualifications Interview-Invoice In-Charge stamped with the action undertaken. The student is given the original to present to the Department of Technical Services for his or her file and the pink copy is retained by the Officer in charge of the section or unit to assist with the making of the weekly report required and then are routed by him to the Qualifications files for the Department and section or unit. The Qualifications Interview-Invoice In-Charge with the returned yellows and the machine green invoices can then see what people have been handled and who have not been handled so as to keep the people moving through the Qualifications Division and thereby receiving the service necessary. It may at times be necessary for the Qualifications Interview-Invoice In-Charge to have a Page called in order to find or locate or bring over a person who did not appear for the service requested. Mary Sue Hubbard LRH:jp.cden The Guardian WW Copyright (c) 1967 for by L. Ron Hubbard L. RON HUBBARD ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Founder 105 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 14 DECEMBER 1971 Issue I Remimeo Qual I & I All Qua] Hats All Tech Hats QEOS Qual Lines Series I THE LINES OF THE CORRECTION DIVISION QUAL INTERVIEW AND INVOICE LINES AND ROUTINGS (Amends HCO PL 20 Nov 67 "The Lines of the Qualifications Division. The Interview Invoice Section.") All public bodies routed in and out of the Correction Division are routed through the Qualifications Interview and Invoice Section. The Qual Interview and Invoice Officer interviews each person very briefly in order to decide what routing is necessary. The interview is extremely short and direct. Once the proper routing is ascertained, the public person is logged in, stating name, date, time and where being routed to, then routed to the proper destination. The Qual I and I handles bodies by logging them in, routing them to their correct terminal, then INVOICING OUT WHERE A PAID SERVICE IS INVOLVED AND COLLECTING THE MONEY FOR THAT SERVICE, or Logging out if no paid service is involved. Qual I and I has a log book in which all designated persons, coming in and going out, are logged in and out, where no invoice is required. Qual I and I has an invoice machine and a lockable cash box for collecting money. (Qual I and I collects invoice packs from the Dir Income and delivers used invoice packs to the Dir Income, collecting a new pack at the same time.) KEEPING THE LINES FLOWING The Qualifications Interview and Invoice Officer must keep the lines moving. By this is meant that the people should be routed as fast as possible to the correct destinations. If there is any delay in service, due to the personnel on that post not being available, the person should be advised that there will be a delay and asked to make themselves available for service. The whole idea is to handle the traffic that is there to be handled and to route these people to the proper service as fast as possible. If there does seem to be more delay than necessary, Qual I and I must advise the QEO, or in his absence, the Qual Sec, so that steps can be taken to put on personnel in order to keep the people moving on the lines and the service delivered. Qual Aide for L. RON HUBBARD LRH:JZ:mes.rd Founder Copyright (~) 1971 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 106 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 14 DECEMBER 1971 Remimeo Issue Il Qual I & I All Qual Hats All Tech Hats QE0s Qual Lines Series 2 QUAL STUDENT LINES There are several different lines for handling students efficiently in Qual. They are as follows: The following student routings are simply LOGGED IN AND LOGGED OUT: I . Students going to Student Examiner for Certification or Classification Exam who pass the Exam. 2. Students coming back to Qual for re-exam (after they have flunked, been to Cramming, and returned to Course to review their materials), and who then pass their re-exam. 3. Students sent for Exams requiring Attestation only are logged in and routed to the Student Examiner, who does his usual check to see that the checksheet has been completed, then meter checks for "falsified" or "Missed" and routes to C&A. IN ALL CASES ABOVE, QUAL I AND I LOGS THE STUDENT IN, ROUTES TO STUDENT EXAMINER, WHO ROUTES THE STUDENT BACK TO QUAL I AND I TO BE LOGGED OUT AND ROUTED VIA C & A OUT TO SUCCESS. 4. Students being routed from Student Examiner or Cramming Officer to Ethics. The student has not yet completed his Cramming cycle, and will return on his routing form to complete, via Qual I and 1. S. Students wanting to see the Chaplain. These are simply logged in, routed to the Chaplain and logged out. 6. Students wanting to use the Org Library. These are logged in, routed to Org Librarian, logged out and routed back to Course on their routing form. The following student routings are LOGGED IN AND INVOICED OUT AND MONEY COLLECTED OR DEBITED: I . Student going to Examiner for Certification or Classification exam, who has flunked the exam. The student is logged in by Qual I & I and routed to Student Examiner. When a student flunks, the Student Examiner routes the student direct to Cramming. When the Cramming is complete, the Cramming Off writes up a chit for Qual I and 1, stating how long the student has been in Cramming. Qual I and I charges by the day. Qual I and I collects the money, or debits, and routes the student back to course to review his materials. The student will return very shortly after to take his re-exam. Cramming finds out what a person has missed. Cramming does not teach courses. 2. Students sent to Dept 13 for Word Clearing Method 2 or Word Clearing Correction List actions: Qual I and I logs in and routes to Qual Clearing Page for assignment to word clearing. When the word clearing is complete, Qual Clearing Page writes up a chit on how many hours and minutes the student has had and routes to Qual I and I. Qual I and I invoices out, collects the money and routes the student back to course. 107 3. Students whose study points are in Emergency or below being sent to Cramming. These students are logged in, routed to Cramming, and invoiced out per chit from Cramming Off, cash collected and routed back to Course on their routing form. 4. Students being routed from Course to see the Medical Officer. The student comes in on a routing form via the Ethics Officer. The only exception to this is sudden injury requiring emergency medical treatment. In this case, the person is logged out and routed to Ethics Officer after the first aid has been administered. The Medical Officer writes up a chit stating any costs payable by the person for Qual I and 1. These costs involve cost for any first aid given, plus costs for any medications or vitamins issued as part of first aid. Where no cost is involved, Qual I and I logs the student out and routes back to Course. 5. Students wanting to purchase or renew Memberships. These are logged in, invoiced for the Membership, the money collected and routed to C & A to collect their Membership Card. 6. Students being routed to Qual by the Registrar, as a flubbed product. These students are logged in and routed to Dir Correction for interview and handling. Dir Correction may route within Qual to Cramming, MO, ARC Break Auditor, Word Clearing, Chaplain or to Ethics. He may call for the student's pc folder and arrange an Intensive in the HGC. Dir Correction writes up immediate Cramming Orders on all personnel involved, including Student Examiner, C & A and Success, and a Commendable chit on the Registrar for picking up this flubbed product. Dir Correction handles internally in Qual or routes out, with instructions, via Qual I and 1. If routed to any internal Qual service, the staff member involved writes up a chit advising the time spent on the service and Qual I and I invoices accordingly. The following Student routing is INVOICED IN and LOGGED OUT., I . Students being routed to Dept 13 for Word Clearing Method One. Students for Method One must PAY IN ADVANCE for this service. So a fully paid up invoice must either be presented to Qual I and I or Qual I and I must invoice and collect for this service before routing to Qual Clearing Page for assignment to word clearing. When the student has completed his Word Clearing Method One, he is routed out on his routing form via Qual I and 1, who logs the student out and routes to C & A and Success. No credit is extended for Word Clearing Method One. Note: When the volume of public demand for Word Clearing Method One increases to the point that it is jamming staff word clearing, it is to be moved over to the HGC, but the C/Sing is retained by the Qual Word Clearing C/S. Qual Aide for L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:JZ:mes.rd Copyright(c) 1971 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 108 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 14 DECEMBER 1971 Remimeo Issue III Qual I and I All Qual Hats All Tech Hats Qual Lines Series 3 QEOs QUAL PRECLEAR LINES Although Qual does not handle Review auditing actions, there is quite a traffic in Preclears and the lines for handling and routing them are as follows: The following preclears are LOGGED IN AND INVOICED 0 UT: I Preclears being routed for a free AR C Break session by the ARC Break Reg. The preclear is logged in by Qual I and I and routed to the ARC Break Auditor. After the session, the ARC Break Auditor writes up a chit stating how long the session was and sends with person on routing form to Qual I and 1. Qual I and I invoices the person out No Charge after the pc has been to the Pc Examiner and the routing form signed by the ARC Break Auditor, and routes back to the Registrar for sign-up for a major service. If a person ever volunteers that he wants to pay for the session, accept the money. Never ask for money from a person who has had an ARC Break session. It would be a commendable for a person to volunteer that he or she wished to pay for the session. Qual I and I should then write up a commendable chit to the ARC Break auditor concerned, for a well handled situation. 2. Preclears wanting to buy or renew Memberships. These are logged in, invoiced for the Membership, the money collected and routed to C & A for their Membership Card. 3. Very occasionally, the ARC Break Auditor could be used to handle an urgent Assist for physical injury. The person is quickly logged in by Qual I and I and routed direct to the ARC Break Auditor for handling. After the session, the ARC Break Auditor writes up a chit stating how long the session was and sends to Qual I and I with the person. Qual I and I invoices, collects the money and routes the person to the Ethics Officer for interview. In some cases, the person may require fast medical attention prior to the Assist. In this instance, the person is logged in, routed to the MO, who handles the first aid needed and routes direct to the ARC Break Auditor for handling. He attaches his chit for any costs involved to the routing form for Qual I and I to include on the invoice when the person has had the Assist. The following preclears are LOGGED IN and MAY BE LOGGED OUT OR INVOICED OUT, according to Dir Correction or Qual See Instructions: I . Preclears routed to Qual who have flunked the Key Questions check at Success. They are logged in by Qual I & I and routed to the Dir Correction for interview. If the Dir Correction is not immediately available, route to the Qual See. Dir Correction interviews the preclear and finds out what he can. He may at this point route the preclear for a free ARC Break Session. If this is done, it is handled by Qual I and I as per (1) above. Dir Correction calls for the folder from Tech Services and may decide to send the pc back to the HGC for case repair. In this case, he writes up a chit to Qual I and I to route the preclear back to the (c) of P. Dir Correction also writes up the Cramming orders for the C/S, Auditor, Pc Examiner, C & A. 109 2. Preclears being routed to Qual from the Registrar. The pc is logged in and routed to the Dir Correction, who interviews the pc The pc may be routed for a free ARC Break session, and is handled by Qual I and I as per (1). Or the pc may be routed back to the HGC or Ethics for further handling. The pc is then logged out per Dir Correction handling orders. Dir Correction calls for the pc folder and writes up the necessary Cramming orders on the C/S, Auditor, Pc Examiner, C & A and Success Off. The following preclears are INVOICED IN and LOGGED OUT: I Preclears being routed for Word Clearing Method One. These pay in advance and no credit is extended. Qual I and I must inspect a fully paid invoice or invoice and collect for the service before routing to Qual Clearing Page for the service. They are simply logged out on completion of the service. The following preclears are LOGGED IN and LOGGED OUT I Preclears wanting to see the Chaplain. Qual I and I logs in and routes to Chaplain and logs out after the person has seen the Chaplain. The Chaplain reports any matters requiring handling to the correct terminal. Ethics matters are reported to Ethics Officer and any correction actions needed to the Dir Correction in writing. The following preclears are ONLY LOGGED OUT. I . pcs, for Declare? The folder is brought to the Pc Examiner in advance of the pc by a Folder Page. The Routing Form is placed on top of the folder. Pc Examiner checks to see that the Grade or Rundown has been correctly audited to EP, then requests a Tech Page to send the pc to the Pc Examiner. The Pc Examiner does the completion check and routes the preclear to Qual I and 1, who logs the preclear out and routes to C & A and Success. If the Pc Examiner finds that the Grade or Rundown has not been correctly run, he must write up an Out Tech chit and route the folder to Dir Correction for handling. Dir Correction reviews the folder and writes up any instructions, plus Cramming orders for the C/S and Auditor, then returns the folder to Tech Services. The following preclears are NEITHER LOGGED IN NOR OUT: 1. Preclears who come to see the Pc Examiner for their routine end of session Pc Examiner check. These preclears are technically still in the HGC and so are neither logged in nor out. The Pc Examiner check at this point is a Qual check on day by day service to report on session quality. The Pc Examiner sends a chit to the Cramming Officer daily reporting all Red Tag Pc Exam Forms to ensure that Cramming is done on each and every flubbed session. This gives the Cramming Officer a check to see that the C/S is ordering all flubbing auditors to Cramming. In cases where this is not done, the Cramming Off calls the Auditor and the C/S in for Cramming cycles. 2. Preclears who do not wish to attest to a Grade or Rundown at Pc Examiner. In this case, the Pc Examiner routes the folder to Dir Correction, who writes up the Cramming orders on the Auditor and C/S. The pc returns to the HGC. LRH:JZ:mes.rd Qual Aide Copyright (c) 1971 for by L. Ron Hubbard L. RON HUBBARD ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Founder 110 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex Remimeo HCO POLICY LETTER OF 14 DECEMBER 1971 Qual I & I Issue IV All Qual Hats All Tech Hats Qual Lines Series 4 QEOS TEOs All staff QUAL STAFF SERVICE LINES The Correction Division provides a high degree of service to all staff in an Organization. The lines for staff in and out of Qual are as follows: I . Staff members who are students or preclears in Div IV. They are handled as per student and preclear routings in Qual Lines Series Nos. 2 and 3. Contracted staff are charged 50% for Cramming. The Cramming charge is immediately collectible. Word Clearing Method One is invoiced at No Charge to contracted staff by Qual I and 1. Uncontracted staff pay full price for Cramming and all Qual services, and all moneys are immediately collectible. 2. Staff members who want first aid or, medical service. They are routed to Qual I and I on a routing form via the Ethics Officer, logged in and routed to the MO. Medical Officer advises of any costs involved and Qual I and I invoices out for the costs and collects or debits the person. 3. Staff members who are routing in from the Staff Ratting College for a Staff Status exam or other staff exam, who pass the exam. These are logged in by Qual I and I and logged out. 4. Staff members who route in for a Staff Status or other staff exam, who flunk the exam. These are logged in by Qual I and I and invoiced out on a No Charge invoice. Cramming writes the usual chit containing the time in hours and minutes in Cramming. This is written on the No Charge invoice. If at any time a person should break his contract, the moneys for the No Charge staff training in Cramming become payable and are added to the Freeloader bill. 5. Staff members who route in to Cramming, as ordered by their senior, senior Org Execs or anyone in Qual. These are simply logged in and invoiced out No Charge, as per 4 above. 6. Staff members who do not require to log in or out: Staff going to see STO, Personnel Programmer, Chaplain, Staff Librarian, Staff Information Officer. These do not require to be logged in or out, as they are regular org service lines and maintain their own logging systems. 7. Staff members for Word Clearing Method 2 or Post Purpose Clearing in Dept 13. These are logged in and routed to Qual Clearing Page, who schedules for service. Qual Clearing Page writes up a chit on how many hours and minutes of Word Clearing and Post Purpose Clearing were delivered and Qual I and I invoices the staff member at No Charge, and writing the cost on the invoice, as per 4 above. LRH:JZ:mes.rd Qual Aide Copyright (c) 1971 for by L. Ron Hubbard L. RON HUBBARD ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Founder HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 14 DECEMBER 1971 Issue V Remimeo Qual I and I All Qual Hats All Tech Hats QEOs TEOs Qual Lines Series 5 QUAL TECHNICAL LINES There are several purely technical lines between the Technical and Correction Divisions which need to be stated, as follows: I STAFF PC FOLDER LINE FROM THE HGC TO STAFF CIS Folders travel direct from Tech Services to the Staff CIS. Tech Pages collect and deliver the folders. 2. SENIOR CIS FOLDER LINE FROM THE HGC Senior CIS in Qual, directly under the Qual See (Qua] See wears this hat if there is no single hatted Senior CIS in the org), gets all Red Tag folders for the day, plus any other folders the Tech CIS is having trouble with and wants assistance on, or any other folder that the Senior CIS wants to see. Tech CIS sees the Red Tag folders first, then has his Folder Page deliver these to the Senior CIS. Senior CIS also gets a daily list of Red Tag folders from the PC Examiner as a double check on the folders sent from the HGC. Senior C/S writes up any Cramming orders not covered or issued by the Div IV CIS and crams the Div IV CIS where needed. 3. INTERNE AND HGC A AUDITOR ROUTINGS: Internes and HGC Auditors have direct lines into the Tech Division and do not pass through Qual I and I in the course of their daily training or Cramming cycles. Qua] Aide for L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:JZ:mes.rd Copyright (c) 1971 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 112 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 14 DECEMBER 1971 Remimeo Issue VI Qual I & I All Qual Hats Qual Lines Series 6 QEOs QUAL INTERVIEW AND INVOICE OFFICER LINES - ADMINISTRATION There are certain admin actions which need to be done in order to keep the lines in in Qual. Qual I and I should put up a notice in her area listing the paid services of Qual and their prices. INVOICING A. Writing an Invoice In invoicing, the following must be written on the invoice: A. The person's name (in capitals). B. The date and time of day. C. The service taken. D. The amount of time of the service. E. The cost of the service. F. Debit or Credit, as applicable. G. Get the person to sign the invoice on the machine. B. Routing of Invoice Copies There are five copies of invoices currently in use. They are routed as follows: A. The top copy goes to the person. B. The second copy is retained by Qual I and I for stat and records purposes. C. The third and fourth copies, plus the money collected for the day, are hand delivered to the Dir Income or FBO at the end of each day. D. The fifth copy is left in the machine until 2 pm each Thursday, when the week's unbroken copies are torn off and hand routed to the Dir Income. The new statistic for the Qual I and I is: Total amount of money collected for the week by reason of Qual Services or Memberships. Qual I and I also collects all invoices for Membership moneys collected by Dept 6, 7 or Public Division personnel for inclusion in the statistic. It is true that credit is granted for Qual services (except Word Clearing Method 1) but every effort should be made to COLLECT for these services, as it is found that refusal to pay is a direct indicator that the person has not been handled. If the person comes back and pays for the service within one week of the service, it is countable in the Qual I and I statistic. Credit collections of Qual moneys are not countable on the Qual statistic, if more than one week old. If the Dir Correction pulls the person in fast and sees that he is fully handled and the person now pays in full or part for Qual services, this money is countable in the statistic. So Qual I and I has a vested interest by reason of statistic and being a Qual staff member, in seeing that all persons are fully handled and do attain full results. Qual I and I must report in writing to Dir Correction any person who does not pay for their service. It will be very easy for Qual I and I to get his statistic up. All he has to do is get Qual services paid for and collect lots and lots of Membership moneys. LRH:JZ:mes.rd Qual Aide Copyright (c) 1971 for by L. Ron Hubbard L. RON HUBBARD ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Founder 113 PURPOSE HCO BOARD OF REVIEW (From HCO Policy Letter of 27 November 1959, Key to the Organizational Chart of the Founding Church of Scientology of Washington DC] To validate for full results every certificate ever issued in Dianetics and Scientology. To be the final authority on any certificates to be issued. To be the final authority on Clear certification. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:jw.rd Copyright(c) 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [Note: The full Policy Letter is given in Volume 7, page 138.1 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 31 JULY 1965 [Excerpt] Remimeo All Qual Hats DEPARTMENT OF EXAMINATIONS The prime purpose of the Department of Examinations and all its sections and units is: "TO HELP RON ENSURE THAT THE TECHNICAL RESULTS OF THE ORGANIZATION ARE EXCELLENT AND CONSISTENT, THAT STUDENTS AND PRECLEARS ARE WITHOUT FLAW FOR THEIR SKILL OR STATE WHEN PASSED AND THAT ANY TECHNICAL DEFICIENCY OF ORG PERSONNEL IS REPORTED AND HANDLED SO THAT THE TECHNICAL RESULTS OF THE ORGANIZATION CONTINUE TO BE EXCELLENT AND CONSISTENT." IT MUST BE KEPT IN MIND THAT THE PRODUCT OF THE ORGANIZATION IS NOT SCIENTOLOGISTS, BUT CONDITIONS CHANGED BY SCIENTOLOGY. THEREFORE THE ABILITY OF THE AUDITOR TO CHANGE CONDITIONS IN PRECLEARS AND THE ABILITY OF THE PRECLEAR OR CLEAR TO CHANGE CONDITIONS ALONG THE DYNAMICS ARE THE ONLY CONCERN OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EXAMINATIONS. The orders, rules, regulations, policies and routes relating to this department were intended to assist it and expedite the carrying out of its purpose. Therefore no order, rule, regulation, policy or route may be interpreted to swerve the Department of Examinations from its prime purpose, which is paramount in all its activities. Its policies and routes exist to carry out its prime purpose and for no other reason. The integrity of Scientology and its hope for beings in this Universe are entrusted to the Department of Examinations. LRH:ml.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright (c) 1965 by L. Ron Hubbard [Excerpted from HCO Policy Letter of 31 July 1965, Purposes Of ALL RIGHTS RESERVED the Qualifications Division. A complete copy appears on page 1.1 114 NOT HCO POLICY LETTER ORIGINAL COLOUR FLASH NOT GREEN ON WHITE CERTIFICATION BOARD DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES Effective for first class or processees concluding after January, 195 1 The Certification Board of a certified auditors' school has as its chief responsibility the certifying of students of the school. As such it is one of the most responsible and trustworthy posts of the Foundation and can be manned only by the most trustworthy personnel. The Board is headed by the Chief Examiner. He is the only full-time member of the Board. He may request, to aid him in check-running and examining students, auditors from the Processing Units or from the Clearing Service but he must not overstrain either organization. He is not to use, for check runs, instructing auditors from the school. It is expected that the Chief Examiner deliver, himself, examinations to the students. And it is not expected that he certify anyone unless he himself has interviewed the person. The Board has a dual purpose, First, it has in its charge the certification of students and second it has in its charge the awards given to instructing auditors and to auditors in the processing units. For 4- week Students The student is expected to receive an oral and a written examination and a check on his auditing skill as measured by his actual performance in the 4th week on his intensive assigned preclear. Should the student pass these successfully, the Certification Board awards him a temporary certification as a Dianetic Auditor. This certificate is lettered exactly like the final certificate but it has no engraving on the border and it has printed diagonally across it in outlined letters, TEMPORARY CERTIFICATE EXPIRES - (date to be written in, date to be six months from the date of issue). The temporary certificate is conditional upon the temporary auditor's delivering to the Board of Certification, by mail or otherwise, completely satisfactory evidence as to his having released a mental aberration or a psychosomatic illness of some magnitude. This evidence must be in the nature of validation material and its protocol is severe. For the mental aberration case, psychometry must be given to the temporary auditor's preclear before and after, and the psychometry must. be of a kind as to bear the most rigid examination. For the psychosomatic illness before and after medical examinations must be made with complete laboratory tests and X-rays where indicated. Such evidence must be signed by a doctor. The evidence, further, must be in compact form and yet must give the Dianetic history of the case. The Board of Certification gives to each temporary auditor a printed or mimeographed form explaining exactly what is wanted by the Board before it awards permanent certification. The Board makes it known to the temporary auditor that the Foundation will furnish him with both preclears and testing service should he wish to remain at the Foundation and complete his work for permanent certification there, a charge being made to the certified auditor for such service. For 6-week Students The standard certifying course of the Foundation schools is six weeks in duration. During this period the student will have processed three (3) persons, all of them on an intensive basis. Certification of such students can be based on observation of them in actual auditing sessions, on the psychometry of their preclears and upon oral and written examinations. The straight check-run becomes unnecessary if the Chief Examiner observes them while they are actually auditing. Permanent certification is awarded by the Chief Examiner. The certificate is handed out at the conclusion of training, if awarded. In accordance with the organizational memorandum about awards, the Board of Certification informs the administrator concerning the number of students who have been certified each week and the name of their instructor. Further, the Board of Certification reviews the psychometry of all persons processed by the processing unit and sends a statement to the administrator concerning those who, in the period between the before and the after psychometry, increased in their total intelligence factors 25 points, as registered by the California Test for Mental Maturity or a corresponding rise in a similar test and the name of the auditor who did the processing. This list of certifications of temporary auditors shall each week contain the names of all the students in the class with those temporarily certified designated and shall be in 115 such form as to be conspicuously posted by the administrator. The processing list shall likewise contain the names or reference numbers of all those processed and those who attained the rise in total factors and the name or names of the auditors processing them, so that it can be posted. The Board of Certification is held responsible if the posting does not take place. In special cases of processing, where a processee is processed for more than one week, the Board adjudicates the award of five dollars for each temporary certification and ten dollars for each 25 point gain processee. As it can be seen, considerable trust is placed in the Chief Examiner, for the post is susceptible of favoritism. Failure of trust in this post could do the Foundation and Dianetics enormous harm. The Chief Examiner is enjoined to report all persuasions of breach of trust immediately to the office of the president. Additional duties of the Board of Certification may be given to it from time to time. Such an additional duty is the assistance called for from it by the memorandum on staff grading wherein the Board is a court of appeal for under and over grading by the administrator. Another additional duty, consequent to the intimacy of the Board with the quality of the instruction shall consist of keeping the Director of Training informed as to the weak points of his instructors as represented by the examinations. The Board may also advise new methods of instruction to the Director of Training. The Board may also devise and advise the office of the president of such new methods of training. The Board exists to raise and to maintain at a high level the standards of certified auditors. This is its central purpose. It may recall to it already certified auditors for examination and may recommend suspensions of their certificates but only after the matter has gone through the Board of Ethics and Standards. Precision in keeping appointments is an essence of the operation of the Board. It should never fail to have appointments fairly kept. And whenever it refuses certification to a student it must always make a precise appointment for reexamination of that student at some future date, advising that student of exactly why he was not certified but advising him in such a way as to retain good public relations for the Foundation. The Board of Certification may have appear before it auditors who have not attended the school but who have learned auditing in the field and who wish to be certified. Such examinations shall not be turned down. A charge of $35 shall be made of the non-school auditor to cover costs of his examination and certification. The examination given to the nonschool auditor shall be the same in every way as that given to the school auditor. The nonschool auditor shall be awarded a temporary certification and shall have the same requirements made of him as are made of the school auditor. LRH:ma.rd L. RON HUBBARD Typed: December 12, 1950 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE LONDON HCO POLICY LETTER OF I OCTOBER 1958 Full Distribution [Excerpt] Not Confidential HCO BOARD OF REVIEW We must now recognize that we are training Earth's mental-spiritual practitioners of tomorrow. Therefore: Hereinafter, all examinations for certificates will be conducted by HCO Boards of Review only. General Qualifications and prerequisites for all certificates and degrees worldwide: No candidate for enrollment or examination may be debarred by reason of race, colour, creed, nationality, ideology, age, mental condition, language, former training or social condition. L. RON HUBBARD [The remainder of this Policy Letter gave qualification requirements for HPA/HCA, HCS/BScn and HCS/DScn. A complete copy is in Volume 4, page 269.1 116 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W. I HCO POLICY LETTER OF 25 NOVEMBER 1958 HCO BOARD OF REVIEW-FUNCTION AND PRACTICE The HCO Board of Review is often composed of one or two part time staff auditors working on off hours for HCO and in and under control of HCO or one or more full time expert Scientologists who have served as staff auditors and instructors and who now work full time for HCO. The basis of HCO Board of Review authority lies in the basic functions of HCO. These are Ethics, Technology and Awards. Ethics and Technology are otherwise cared for than by the HCO Board of Review. Awards are wholly the function of the HCO Board of Review. The HCO is the holder of all copyrights, trademarks, registered marks and the rights of all materials of Dianetics and Scientology. Further, HCO holds in trust the signature "L. Ron Hubbard, Founder". This signature is the only thing which makes a certificate valid. This is based on the precedent that the originator of a science has the right to train persons in it and the only original right to sign certificates saying so. No corporation, company, association or Foundation has ever been given the right to sign or issue Dianetics and Scientology awards. The only thing which makes these certificates valid is the signature. The Association, etc, name has no value in the public eye except as signed by LRH. If LRH stopped signing an organization's certificates tomorrow that organization could no longer issue awards of skill and the matter would be upheld in court by reason of trademarks, registered marks and copyrights. Therefore the authority wielded by the HCO Board of Review is quite real. Its stable datum is "We guarantee to LRH that his signature attests proper training and processing". Administratively when the HCO Board of Review passes a student for a level of skill or a pc for clear, it is saying, in effect, to LRH "You can safely sign" and to the public, "You can trust the person who holds this award". The HCO Board of Review, like all the HCO, is a natural rather than arbitrary outgrowth of our needs. Only where we did not have proper award handling by an agency like the HCO Board of Review have we fallen down on this. Therefore, we don't fall down on it any more. We have an HCO Board of Review that can examine and say, "Ron, you can safely sign". It is also an old principle that the people who train cannot also examine. Therefore an Academy or a HASI or another organization enfranchised by the HCO (which grants all actual rights to use materials to such organizations in the first place) has no right to examine. It can only train to the level specified by HCO. It is then up to the HCO through its HCO Board of Review to examine and see if the standard is met. If it is, the HCO Board of Review says "Ron, you can safely sign" and gives LRH the certificate to be signed. The training agency cannot do more than train. It cannot order a student to more processing. It can only collect all the class work, papers, lessons and indicate that the student is ready for examination. It sends the papers to HCO Board of Review. If these papers are complete, (indicated by a check list prepared by HCO) HCO then calls for the student directly, not via the Academy, and administers oral exams where feasible and written exams always. What HCO Board of Review does to guarantee that the requirements as laid down in HCO Bulletins or Policy Letters have been met and that the person can perform the required skills is its own business. If the papers are not complete, HCO Board of Review returns them to the training agency pointing out the discrepancies. When the training agency returns these, then the above procedure is followed-having the student in. 117 If the student passes, HCO Board of Review prepares an authorized certificate with the student's name and presents it to LRH on HCO Comm lines, for the signature "L. Ron Hubbard, Founder". No written examination for any one grade may be repeated within 120 days of the last examination. Thus a student who flunks an HCO Board of Review exam cannot be reexamined for 120 days. There is no limit to the number of examinations he can have. And the failure of a training agency to have the papers complete (HCO Board of Review having to send them back) does not invoke the 120 day clause. In examining the HCO Board of Review should be real, not pedantic. Good TRs, good command of processes for the level, good axioms and theory should pass a student. But to establish these HCO Board of Review needn't examine all day and all night. If the student flunks a few TRs, why go on? He's dead if he ever tries to audit. Why pass him or even examine further? In case of failure, the HCO Board of Review may advise processing or more training but may not say where the training or processing. is to be taken or how much it will cost. These items are all outside of HCO Board of Review purview. On testing for clear, the same principles are followed. If the pc reads wrong on the meter, why go on to an OCA or APA or IQ test? If HCO Board of Review says it's a flunk, that's usually that. The only appeal is to HCO See to LRH and its doubtful if this will produce any change of decision. When the person has passed his exam, HCO makes up the certificate for him, forwards it to LRH and sends it back to the original HCO Board of Review giving the exam. This HCO Board of Review gives the certificate straight to the student, not via a training agency or corporation. The wording on all certificates is specified by HCO main headquarters. They can be locally printed but only on okay from LRH. An HAS certificate doesn't pass through HCO Board of Review, but all others do. It is interesting that the signature of L. Ron Hubbard, Founder on certificates has been deeded over to HCO and "after demise" will still remain, but in seal form, the validating signature on a certificate. Thus these various lines of awarding will not be disrupted and the institution of HCO and HCO Board of Review are here to stay for a long, long while. HCO Boards of Review are necessary in every area where training is done. They can only exist where HCO has enfranchised the local operation with exact rights to the materials of Dianetics and Scientology. HCO Board of Review is established by written appointment by LRH. It has existed on verbal consent in the past but written appointment is now necessary. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mp.eden 118 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W. I HCO POLICY LETTER OF 28 FEBRUARY 1959 Issued in Washington HCO BOARD OF REVIEW DUTIES Academies are poorly informed of HCO Board of Review duties and responsibilities. It is the added responsibility of the HCO Board of Review anywhere to educate the Academy Personnel into functions and responsibilities of HCO Bd of Review and how it differs from the Academy. CERTIFICATE ROUTING Student hands or mails all papers, reports, etc, to Academy Administrator (or Extension Course Director as indicated). All student folders are accompanied by a check sheet listing all items needed for certificate. When total folder is collected to the level of certification, Acad Admin (Certification) sends complete folder to HCO Bd of Review. HCO Bd of Review okays student for certification, (or refuses in which case Acad Admin completes folder again and resubmits) and sends folder back with its check sheet initialed by HCO Bd of Review. Acad Admin (Certification) then has certificate prepared. Certificate with completed check sheet is sent to LRH Founder for signature. Acad Admin holds the folder itself. LRH Founder signs certificate (or refuses at which time whole process is repeated) and returns to Acad Admin (Certification). The HCO Bd of Review is often composed of one or two part time staff auditors working on off hours for HCO and in and under control of HCO or one or more full time expert Scientologists who have served as staff auditors and instructors and who work full time for HCO. The basis of HCO Bd of Review authority lies in the basic functions of HCO. These are Ethics, Technology and Awards. Ethics and Technology are otherwise cared for than by the HCO Bd of Review. Awards are wholly the function of the HCO Bd of Review. No corporation, company, association or foundation has ever been given the right to sign or issue Dianetics and Scientology awards. The only thing which makes these certificates valid is the signature. The association, etc, name has no value in the public eye except as signed by LRH. If LRH stopped signing an organization's certificates tomorrow that organization could no longer issue awards of skill and the matter would be upheld in court by reason of trademarks, registered marks and copyrights. Therefore the authority wielded by the HCO Bd of Review is quite real. Its stable datum is "We guarantee to LRH that his signature attests proper training and processing". Administratively when the HCO Bd of Review passes a student for a level of skill or a pc for clear, it is saying, in effect, to LRH, "You can safely sign" and to the public, "You can trust the person who holds this award". 119 It is also an old principle that the people who train cannot also examine. Therefore an Academy or a HASI or another organization enfranchised by the HCO (which grants all actual rights to use materials to such organisations in the first place) has no right to examine. It can only train to the level specified by HCO. It is then up to the HCO through its HCO Bd of Review to examine and see if the standard is met. If it is, the HCO Bd of Review says "Ron, you can safely sign" and gives LRH the certificate to be signed. The training agency cannot do more than train. It cannot order a student to more processing. It can only collect all the class work, papers, lessons and indicate that the student is ready for examination. It sends the papers to HCO Bd of Review. If these papers are complete, (indicated by a check list prepared by HCO) HCO then calls for the student directly, not via the Academy, and administersoral exams where feasible and written exams always. What HCO Bd of Review does to guarantee that the requirements as laid down in the HCO Bulletins or Policy Letters have been met and that the person can perform the required skills is its own business. If the papers are not complete, HCO Bd of Review returns them to the training agency pointing out the discrepancies. When the training agency returns these, then the above procedure is followed-having the student in. If the student passes, HCO Bd of Review prepares an authorized certificate with the student's name and presents it to LRH on HCO Comm Line, for the signature of "L. Ron Hubbard, Founder". No written examination for any one grade may be repeated within 120 days of the last examination. Thus a student who flunks an HCO Bd of Review exam cannot be re-examined for 120 days. There is no limit to the number of examinations he can have. And the failure of a training agency to have the papers complete (HCO Bd of Review having to send them back) does not invoke the 120 days clause. In examining the HCO Bd of Review should be real, not pedantic. Good TRs, good command of processes for the level, good axioms and theory should pass a student. But to establish these HCO Bd of Review needn't examine all day and all night. If the student flunks a few TRs, why go on? He's dead if he ever tries to audit. Why pass him or even examine further? In case of failure, the HCO Bd of Review may advise processing or more training but may not say where the training or processing is to be taken or how much it will cost. These items are all outside of HCO Bd of Review purview. If HCO Bd of Review says it's a flunk, that's usually that. The only appeal is through HCO See to LRH and it's doubtful if this will produce any change of decision. An HAS certificate doesn't pass through HCO Bd of Review, but all others do. HCO Bd of Review is established by written appointment by LRH. It has existed on verbal consent in the past, but written appointment is now necessary. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mp.lh.cden Copyright (c) 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 120 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W. I HCO POLICY LETTER OF 24 APRIL 1959 To all Academies FINAL HPA EXAM HCO BOARD OF REVIEW NOTE TO EXAMINER This final exam is based on the materials of Scientology; the end goal of its administration is to discover whether the examinee's command of the theory and practice of the subject is sufficiently professional in caliber for us to turn him loose on cases that an HPA level auditor could be expected to handle successfully, in confidence that he will have more successes than failures. The exam comprises two parts: oral, designed to test the student's practical command of the elements of auditing, and written, designed to test his grasp of and ability to apply theory to livingness. The marks on the oral exam are FAILED, POOR, FAIR, GOOD, EXCELLENT. The examiner must himself be an excellent auditor. We want on the part of the student a demonstration of good ARC, an impression of good order and precise handling of the pc and the MEST of the session and session environment; a good auditing presence and certainty of attitude with regard to processes, the subject and the pc; and a good knowledge of and application of some basic process commands and the TRs. A merely mechanical, rote handling of these would be marked POOR or lower. A student scoring POOR or lower should not be passed under any circumstances, no matter how well he does on the theory section. THE ORAL EXAM COUNTS FOR 60% OF THE FINAL GRADE. The marks on the written exam are numerical, total 100. Passing is 75%. It is possible for a student to miss the first three questions (comprising the Logics, Pre-Logics, and Axioms) completely, and by scoring perfectly on the remainder of the written test to get a barely passing mark. There is some emphasis on ingenuity and the ability actually to put Scientology data into application; a student having data by rote with no understanding, or with a low understanding of the subject would fail it miserably. Conversely, someone with an understanding of the subject should pass it well. THE WRITTEN EXAM COUNTS FOR 40% OF THE FINAL GRADE. (The numbers in parenthesis, brackets, following the question indicate the number of points scored for a perfect answer of that question. Imperfect answers receive partial credit insofar as they are to any degree correct.) It is not possible to cover the whole of Scientology exhaustively in one examination of this length; consequently, the questions have been drawn up rather as a representative sampling whose handling will give us a fair idea of the student's ability and state of ARC with the subject and its terminals. PART A: ORAL EXAM-PRACTICE-COUNTS 60% TOWARD FINAL MARK 1. Have examinee start and end an auditing session. PURPOSE: To judge smooth handling of two-way communication with a pc. 2. Have EX handle an ARC break; a cognition; an origination. 3. Have EX deliver the auditing commands of Tone 40 8-C with intention. 4. Have EX deliberately break one item of the Auditor's Code and handle the resulting ARC break smoothly and well. Examinee must announce which item of code he is going to break to examiner, then proceed to violate that exact item, and repair break. 5. Have EX give, with good maintenance of applicable TRs, the exact auditing commands of CCH 1,2,3,4 with proper acks. (CCH 1,2 Tone 40-3,4, formal) 121 The examiner will judge the ability of the examinee to actually audit by scoring him on his command of the environment and session and pc; his certainty of attitude; use of the TRs; AP - C with the pc and auditing presence in general. Grades are EXCELLENT, GOOD, FAIR, POOR, FAILED. PART B: WRITTEN EXAM-THEORY-COUNTS 40% OF FINAL I . Write out in full one (1) of the Pre-Logics in its exact Scientology wording. Paraphrase it in your own words. Give an example of it in action. (3) 2. Write out in full two (2) Logics. Then put each in your own words and give an example of each, relating it to life. (6) 3. Write out in full five Scientology Axioms. Then restate each in your own words. Then give one example of a situation in life which illustrates the working of each axiom (one example per Axiom). 4. Define EVALUATION and give an example of it. (3) 5. Define INVALIDATION and give an example of it. (3) 6. Define SCIENTOLOGY ENGRAM and give an example of it. (3) 7. Define SECONDARY and give an example of one. (3) 8. Define LOCK and give an example of one. (3) 9. Explain briefly (c) & A. Give an example of an auditor's (c) & Aing with a pc (3) 10. Explain briefly and accurately why entering order into a case brings about a flyingoff of confusion. (3) 11. Explain briefly why an auditor should be precise, accurate and overt in his dealings with a pc (3) 12. What is the realest thing to you in Scientology since you encountered this subject? How did it become real to you? (3) 13. Give an example of some life activity on that part of people. Now, name the Dynamics which might apply to this example, showing in each instance why each mentioned dynamic applies to it. (3) 14. Locate someone you know on the KNOW-TO-MYSTERY scale. Explain why this person belongs where your estimation places him. In other words, what can you observe about him that leads you to place him where you do? (3) 15. What action with regard to children can you expect of a person at 1.5? What precisely will a 1. 1 do with a communication you have asked him to forward to another? ' What precisely will a person at 2.3 do if given a post of responsibility in an organization? (3) 16. Write out a statement that would be effective if you were to make it to a person who resonated on the eatingness band to whom you were trying to sell an automobile. Write out a statement that would attract the attention of a person who resonated at mystery whom you were trying to interest in Scientology. (3) 17. Given a person low on the effect scale, what would his probable reaction be on hearing that Russia had dropped an atomic bomb on Iran, killing 300,000 people? What would the probable reaction of this person be on scratching himself while shaving? Explain your answers in terms of the effect scale. (3) 18. What is a second postulate? Give an example from life. (3) 19. Which comes first, remembering or forgetting? Why? (3) 122 20. Why is it necessary to handle a pc's present-time problem? Explain in terms of attention, present-time environment, auditing environment, and the communications formula. (4) 21. Is duplication really necessary? Answer yes or no, and justify your answer in terms of communication. (3) 22. Define ABERRATION in your own words. When is an action on the part of a person to be considered aberrated? (3) 23. In terms of solutions and the dynamics, formulate a simple method which you could use to estimate an individual's probable chances of success in a given enterprise. (2) 24. What would you do if you were auditing a pc on a thinkingness process and you didn't know just how he was executing the auditing command? (2) 25. Why should the detailed investigation of a pc's originations be confined to research? (2) 26. How does a VALENCE differ from a deliberately mocked-up beingness? (2) 27. In terms of the reality scale what phenomena would you expect to observe on the part of a child who had been given a new bicycle as he grow progressively familiar with it? (3) 28. How does having something differ from holding a deed of title to it? (3) 29. If you were to instruct an HPA course, what item of Scientology data would you concentrate on as being the most important for your students to understand? Why? (2) 30. What part of your present life could you bring more order to? How could you go about this? (2) LRH:mp.cden L. RON HUBBARD HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF I I OCTOBER 1960 CenOCon CASE ASSESSMENTS FOR STUDENTS It sometimes happens that a student can graduate from an HPA/HCA course and pass the exam, and yet fail in the field on account of a low case level or poor subjective reality on Scientology. To prevent this, it is now policy that after an HPA/HCA student has passed the HCO Board of Review examination, and before a certificate is issued, he shall be required to have from the HCO Board of Review a case assessment. If it is found that their case is in poor shape, or that they have little subjective reality on Scientology, they must be ordered to processing before their certificate can be issued. LRH:js.rd Issued by: Peter Hemery Copyright (c) 1960 HCO Secretary WW by L. Ron Hubbard for ALL RIGHTS RESERVED L. RON HUBBARD 123 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 22 FEBRUARY 1961 (Issue II) HCO Secs Please have an adequate number of these run off. Use to give Permanent Staff Exams. No Permanent Staff Status is valid unless this exam has been passed. Passing grade is 85%. The Pattern of a Central Org HCO Policy Letter may not be in hand while the exam is being done. PERMANENT STAFF EXAM "PATTERN OF A CENTRAL ORGANIZATION" PART ONE I . What are the duties of an HCO Area Office? 2. What has HCO Area the power to do? 3. What does HCO Board of Review do? 4. What is the purpose and duty of HCO Continental? 5. What is the Assoc See in a Central Organization for? 6. Who expedites Assoc See's communications? 7. What are the Assoc See's duties? 8. What are the main responsibilities of an Assoc See? 9. What are the two Divisions in a Central Organization? 10. Name the three departments which fall under each Division. 11. What is the pc Foundation? 12. What is the Test section and what is its purpose? 13. What is the purpose of a pc Course? 14. What is the purpose of a HAS Co-Audit? 15. Give another name for HAS Co-Audit? 16. How does a pc Foundation fail? 17. What happens when the pc Foundation does fail? 18. Who is the most responsible person for solvency in a Central Org next to the Assoc See? 19. Who heads the Academy of Scientology? 20. What is the Academy responsible for? 21. Name the Courses taught in the Academy. 22. What makes the Academy? 23. How often does enrolling take place for an HPA course? 24. What is the Practical Course? And how does this differ from a professional course? 25. What are the results of a poorly run Academy? 26. What does HGC stand for? 27. Who heads the HGC and what cases fall under her control? 28. Who does the administration for (c) of P? 29. How often does the (c) of P interview HGC cases and why? 30. What happens when (c) of P does admin work or audits a preclear? 31. How good must HGC quality be? 32. Which run-down must a staff auditor use and what must he produce? 33. Who heads the Dept of Promotion and Registration in the largest of Central Orgs? 34. Otherwise, who heads its two sections? 35. What does the personal Registration section do? 36. What should all Registrars call themselves for public purposes? 37. What is the difference between a Chief Registrar and pc and Letter Registrar as regards income? 38. Where do Personal Registrars look for prospects when prospects seem too few? 124 39. Who does the final accepting of applicants for training and processing? 40. What is the procedure after a person is signed up by the Personal Registrar for processing? 41. Who should always interview a student or preclear after training or processing and why? 42. What is the motto of the Personal Registrar? 43. What is the rule as regards Registrars acceptance of money and why? 44. What should be done when a Registrar is dissatisfied with results? 45. What do the Letter Registrar and Assistants do? 46. What hats fall under the Letter Registrar? 47. Which people have a file folder in C/F? 48. How are files in CF divided? 49. Which of these does the magazine go to? 50. What should go into CF files? 51. What is the purpose of the address unit? 52. Why should address in charge receive a copy of all invoices? 53. What unit issues HAS Certificates and Memberships? 54. Which is better - volume or quality of letters? 55. Who heals, ARC Breaks and how are ARC Breaks prevented? 56. What is the procedure when personal Registration wants a file from C/F? 57. What method is used when any other dept wants files? 58. What is Dir Material responsible for? 59. What dept does all purchasing for the Organization? 60. Whose approval is needed before an item can be purchased? 61. If an item is already approved and Material Dept sees danger in buying it, what does he do? 62. Next to purchasing, which is the next biggest potential upset in the Material Dept? 63. Who heads Dept of Accounts and what is the purpose of this Dept? 64. Explain briefly what a Scientology Accounts System is? 65. What are the four sets of files used in the Accounts System? 66. How is a staff member paid? by cash or by cheque? 67. Does the Accounts Dept keep ledgers, journals, etc? 68. What weekly Accounts sheet is shown on the Staff Bulletin Board each week? 69. How many report forms are due from each Dept every week? 70. What Technical form is submitted by Students? What technical form is submitted by Staff Auditors? 71. If you needed to know any policy or more about any department or your post, where would you find it? 72. How should a staff member be judged and how should he not be judged? 73. What is a good way of getting people in? 74. When free weeks are demanded, what line has broken down and what does this mean? 75. When should a person not be taken on as Dept Head and when should a person not be taken on as a staff auditor? L. RON HUBBARD LRH:ln.js.cden Copyright (c) 1961 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 125 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 APRIL 1961 Cen Orgs HCO Secs Assoc Secs Ds of P Do not Remimeo EXAMINATIONS OF ACADEMY STUDENTS TO BE DONE BY DIRECTOR OF PROCESSING HCO herewith delegates its examination functions of HASI Academy students to the Director of Processing, and whatever auditors the Director of Processing may assign to assist. This means that the HCO Board of Review functions are delegated to the Director of Processing. HCO Area Secretary or Continental Secretary may at any time re-examine any student, but unless re-examination is undertaken the examination of the Director of Processing, or his or her staff, shall be final. In the event of re-examination the examination given directly by HCO shall be final. Irrespective of the curriculum taught in the Academy at the level of HPA/HCA, the examination of anyone for an HPA/HCA examination shall cover only and precisely the following points: ORAL: The student candidate for HPA/HCA shall be orally examined on each of the following points: Communication Course TRs. Upper Indoc TRs. Knowledge of the E-Meter. Knowledge of the CCHs 1 to 4, and their proper use. WRITTEN: Knowledge of the Model Session. Knowledge of each basic process used in the rudiments. Knowledge of the Axioms. Knowledge of the Tone Scale. knowledge of the six types of Processes. Knowledge of an Assist. Knowledge of the Auditor's Code. Knowledge of the Code of a Scientologist. Knowledge of the twenty or more parts of the Anatomy of the Mind. Knowledge of HCO functions. Knowledge of HASI functions. HUBBARD CLEARING SCIENTOLOGIST or B. Sen. or Special Events Course or Permanent Staff Auditor. ORAL: Knowledge of the E-Meter. Knowledge of the TRs 0 to 10. Knowledge of E-Meter Actions on Assessment. WRITTEN, Knowledge of the Model Session. Knowledge of Havingness and Confront Processes. Knowledge of the Pre-Hav Scale. Knowledge of SOP Goals 126 39. Who does the final accepting of applicants for training and processing? 40. What is the procedure after a person is signed up by the Personal Registrar for processing? 41. Who should always interview a student or preclear after training or processing and why? 42. What is the motto of the Personal Registrar? 43. What is the rule as regards Registrars acceptance of money and why? 44. What should be done when a Registrar is dissatisfied with results? 45. What do the Letter Registrar and Assistants do? 46. What hats fall under the Letter Registrar? 47. Which people have a file folder in C/F? 48. How are files in CF divided? 49. Which of these does the magazine go to? 50. What should go into CF files? 51. What is the purpose of the address unit? 52. Why should address in charge receive a copy of all invoices? 53. What unit issues HAS Certificates and Memberships? 54. Which is better-volume or quality of letters? 55. Who heals ARC Breaks and how are ARC Breaks prevented? 56. What is the procedure when personal Registration wants a file from C/F? 57. What method is used when any other dept wants files? 58. What is Dir Material responsible for? 59. What dept does all purchasing for the Organization? 60. Whose approval is needed before an item can be purchased? 61. If an item is already approved and Material Dept sees danger in buying it, what does he do? 62. Next to purchasing, which is the next biggest potential upset in the Material Dept? 63. Who heads Dept of Accounts and what is the purpose of this Dept? 64. Explain briefly what a Scientology Accounts System is? 65. What are the four sets of files used in the Accounts System? 66. How is a staff member paid? by cash or by cheque? 67. Does the Accounts Dept keep ledgers, journals, etc? 68. What weekly Accounts sheet is shown on the Staff Bulletin Board each week? 69. How many report forms are due from each Dept every week') 70. What Technical form is submitted by Students? What technical form is submitted by Staff Auditors? 71. If you needed to know any policy or more about any department or your post, where would you find it? 72. How should a staff member be judged and how should he not be judged? 73. What is a good way of getting people in? 74. When free weeks are demanded, what line has broken down and what does this mean? 75. When should a person not be taken on as Dept Head and when should a person not be taken on as a staff auditor? L. RON HUBBARD LRH:ln.is.cden Copyright (c) 1961 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 125 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 APRIL 1961 Cen Orgs HCO Secs Assoc Secs Ds of P Do not Remimeo EXAMINATIONS OF ACADEMY STUDENTS TO BE DONE BY DIRECTOR OF PROCESSING HCO herewith delegates its examination functions of HASI Academy students to the Director of Processing, and whatever auditors the Director of Processing may assign to assist. This means that the HCO Board of Review functions are delegated to the Director of Processing, HCO Area Secretary or Continental Secretary may at any time re-examine any student, but unless re-examination is undertaken the examination of the Director of Processing, or his or her staff, shall be final. In the event of re-examination the examination given directly by HCO shall be final. Irrespective of the curriculum taught in the Academy at the level of HPA/HCA, the examination of anyone for an HPA/HCA examination shall cover only and precisely the following points: ORAL: The student candidate for HPA/HCA shall be orally examined on each of the following points: Communication Course TRs. Upper Indoc TRs. Knowledge of the E-Meter. Knowledge of the CCHs I to 4, and their proper use. WRITTEN. Knowledge of the Model Session. Knowledge of each basic process used in the rudiments. Knowledge of the Axioms. Knowledge of the Tone Scale. knowledge of the six types of Processes. Knowledge of an Assist. Knowledge of the Auditor's Code. Knowledge of the Code of a Scientologist. Knowledge of the twenty or more parts of the Anatomy of the Mind. Knowledge of HCO functions. Knowledge of HASI functions. HUBBARD CLEARING SCIENTOLOGIST or B.Scn. or Special Events Course or Permanent Staff Auditor. ORAL: Knowledge of the E-Meter. Knowledge of the TRs 0 to 10 Knowledge of E-Meter Actions on Assessment. WRITTEN: Knowledge of the Model Session. Knowledge of Havingness and Confront Processes. Knowledge of the Pre-Hav Scale. Knowledge of SOP Goals 126 Knowledge of definitions of Release and Clear Knowledge of the Pre-Hav Scale. Knowledge of SOP Goals. Knowledge of definitions of Release and Clear. Knowledge of Auditor's Code. Knowledge of the Code of a Scientologist. HUBBARD PRACTICAL SCIENTOLOGIST Examination of Hubbard Practical Scientologist shall be done by the Director of Training only, and the Certificate shall be issued as a result of eight weeks training without repeat weeks and on a mild examination. However, the record must be kept in the Training Department and if the person becomes a candidate of HPA/HCA level those weeks flunked earlier must be repeated. To obtain his HPA/HCA an HPS must complete his or her Extension Course, must serve in the Central Organization in some capacity, paid or unpaid, for upwards of three months and must show that he can produce good results on cases. If a Hubbard Practical Scientologist is to be employed as a Staff Auditor, he must have passed the above examination given by the Director of Processing, for the level of HPA/HCA. Certification of Hubbard Practical Scientologist is done on the representation of the Director of Training only. CERTIFICATE PREPARATION Certificates are still prepared and issued by HCO Area See, no matter who does the examination. The above assignment of HCO Board of Review functions to the Director of Processing apply to student examinations only, and do not apply to. Release and Clear examinations, and this delegation shall be effective at once. The examination outlined above shall be effective 15th June 196 1, and until that time students shall be examined on the technology on which they have been trained. The Director of Training should re-adjust his curriculum in ample time to meet the above requirements. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:jl.cden Copyright (c) 1961 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 1 127 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 19 SEPTEMBER 1961 (Cancels HCO Policy Letter of 23 November 1960, same title) Central Orgs REALITY TEST FOR STUDENTS In order to test whether a student can in fact audit a preclear in real life, the following procedure should be adopted by the HCO Board of Review. A candidate for HPA examination should be given a first week HPA student as a preclear, and must then presession him and get off his ARC breaks, PTPs and Withholds, arid then proceed to find a havingness process that works. He should be given three or four hours to do this; the examiner would look in occasionally and check progress. The old student would then complete an appropriate security check on the new student. Afterwards the student preclear would be checked on an E-Meter by the examiner to see if there was any major withhold or anything showing heavy charge, which could reasonably have been found and handled by the examination candidate, but was missed by him. This would ensure that the HPA/HCA could get rudiments in and do a Security check. All arrangements should be made by the (c) of T. Examination should be completed by the (c) of P or an appointed staff auditor. LRH:jl.rd Issued by: Peter Hemery Copyright(c) 1961 HCO Secretary WW by L. Ron Hubbard for ALL RIGHTS RESERVED L. RON HUBBARD (Note: This issue introduced the old student doing a See Check on the new, and added the last two paragraphs.] HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 20 SEPTEMBER 1961 CenOCon Franchise TRAINING POLICY In order to emphasize the value of improved training in Academies and to encourage students to qualify for certificates without delay, the following policies are instituted. On and after January 1st, 1962, only students who have successfully completed an Academy course on or after July 1st, 1961 shall be examined and certificated by the HCO Board of Review. Any students who have completed their Academy training before July 1st, 1961 should be notified of this. The HCO Board of Review should also inform them of the latest date on which they can be examined. If they do not attend and pass their examination and complete their certificate requirements by 3 1 st December, 196 1, they will be required to take further training in the Academy at their own expense before being allowed to be examined or certificated by the HCO Board of Review. Also, students who complete (or have completed) the Academy course on or after July Ist, 1961, shall be required to pass the HCO Board of Review exam, and to complete their certificate requirements, within 12 months. If after 12 months they have not done so, they will not be allowed to be examined or certificated by the HCO Board of Review until they have taken further training in the Academy, at their own expense. LRH-.jl.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright(c) 1961 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 128 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 2 NOVEMBER 1961 BPI ALLOWED PROCESSES FROM COURSES As it is taking three months or more at Saint Hill to make a qualified Class III auditor, and as all field courses are only six weeks, my experience and data on progress of these courses demands, in fairness to the public, that: No Course not taught at Saint Hill may qualify a field auditor for Class III processes, and no field auditor or HGC auditor not qualified as Class III may use Routine 3. See Safety Table HCO Bulletin of October 26, 196 1. It is too dangerous running the wrong goal and terminal to permit auditors not qualified to find and run them on pcs. LRH:imj.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright (c) 1961 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 2 NOVEMBER 1961 Issue II Gen Non- (Reissued 3 March 1967) Remimeo Tech Hats Qual Hats Keeper of the Seals and Signature TRAINING QUALITY It becomes fantastically, screamingly apparent that we must not ever turn out or let go a bad auditor, poorly trained. Accordingly put permanent signs where (c) of T and Dir of Exams can see them in their offices as follows: EVERY TIME YOU TURN OUT A BAD AUDITOR YOU MAKE ENEMIES FOR SCIENTOLOGY. INCOMPETENT AUDITORS ARE A MAJOR SOURCE OF OUR TROUBLES. LRH:jp.oden L. RON HUBBARD Copyright(c) 1967 Founder by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 129 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 JANUARY 1962 CenOCon Saint Hill Franchise HCO BOARD OF REVIEW CLASS 11 AWARDS Awards of Class Il shall be made as follows at Saint Hill, and in all Central Organizations and HCOs. First step consists of completing the check sheet of all pertinent bulletins and tapes, each one examined and passed upon by an examiner. These examinations must be passed, each one, 100% by oral questioning. The examiner need not be the HCO Board of Review. Second step is the completion of all demonstrations called for on the checksheet such as the actual ten manifestations of the needle, knowing and reading the actual meter on them, Model Session with all TRs and any other demonstration item. Passing of these two qualifies the auditor as a temporary Class IIb. It does not award the classification or any additional pay because of it. The third step is the passing of a general written and actual demonstration examination on the skills and knowledge of Class 11. This final examination is done by the HCO Board of Review. It must be passed 100%. Courses in auditing may only award Class Ilb when class examination clearly conforms to this Policy Letter. Class llb does not increase pay or deliver other benefits. It does permit the auditor to practise for Class 111. Anyone awarded a Class Ilb should preserve the check sheet on knowledge and demonstration against future HCO Board of Review Examination. An HCO Board of Review may examine anyone with a completed and instructor verified check sheet, whether from field or organization. If the student is not from a recognized Class II Course or has not studied under a Saint Hill graduate any single item on the check sheet may be re-examined and failure to pass it shall constitute a failure of the whole examination. If from a recognized course for Class If or Central Organization staff, the whole regular examination shall be given, with practical demonstration on needle action first, Model Session with all TRs in second, and a general written examination based precisely on Class II materials third. Failure of any one of the first two parts makes it unnecessary for the Board of Review to give the next part. Re-examination may not be taken in the same week. One week must intervene between examinations for Class 11. No certificate or writing may be issued for Class Ilb. A formal letter or certificate may be issued for Class 11. No check sheet from the field or a course may be considered valid for a Central Organization examination for Class Ilb or Class 11. No check sheet of any kind or Class 11 award of any kind may be considered valid at Saint Hill on the Special Briefing Course, but having obtained such elsewhere would, of course, make it easier to pass at Saint Hill. An HCO Board of Review examination anywhere except Saint Hill, shall cost the equivalent of f 10 sterling payable to the Area HCO, for each and every examination taken, whether a reexamination or not. This charge shall also be made to Central Organizations for their staff members. (Class III Classification will follow similar lines to this Policy Letter.) LRH:sf.cden L. RON HUBBARD Copyright (c) 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 130 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 31 JULY 1962 CenOCon ORAL EXAMINATION FOR HPA/HCA An examiner must not be used as the subject on which the student auditor demonstrates his/her degree of auditing skill. A student must provide his/her own demonstration subject. Errors in meter reading are 90% of a student's difficulties, and it is not possible to observe these errors if the examiner is acting as the preclear. LRH:dr.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright(c) 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 5 SEPTEMBER 1964 Sthil Only EXAMINATIONS (Effective this date) As long standing policy forbids an examination for classification or certification by the person who trained the student, no provisional or final classification examination may be given by a Supervisor, Secretary or Instructor of the Course. Any examination for any classification must be given by a staff member at or above the classification level being examined. As long as the post is occupied by a property classified person the HCO (WW) Ltd International Org Supervisor will prepare, give and correct all Class VI Provisional or Permanent Examinations as an additional duty. LRH:jw.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright (c) 1964 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 12 APRIL 1965 Gen Non Remimeo CLASSIFICATION PASS MARKS The pass mark for Classification Examinations for all classes including VI is now 85%, When the pass mark was lowered to 80% rechecks showed four students classified at less than 85% subsequently did not do well with the level for which they had been classed with a less than 85% grade. Therefore only 85% or above is the passing mark for classification. LRH:wmc.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright(c) 1965 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 131 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 29 JUNE 1966 Remimeo Tech Sec Qual Execs All Students KEEP ACADEMY CHECK SHEETS UP-TO-DATE Any new HCO Bulletins which are issued and which are needed on a particular level must be added to the Check Sheets for that level, before the student receives the check sheet. The purpose of this policy letter is that of ensuring that students are trained in the latest materials pertinent to that level. It is the responsibility of the Technical Secretary and the Director of Training to see that this is done. The Qualifications Secretary and the Director of Examinations must likewise see that examinations cover the new data as it is issued and correctly examine students on the required material who have had such added to their check sheet. This policy letter does not modify existing policy that a student may not have items added to a check sheet on which he has already started working. LRH:lb-r.rd Copyright(c) 1966 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF I FEBRUARY 1967 Remimeo (Replaces HCO Policy Letter of Students 29 October 1965 of same name) Tech Staff Qual Staff STUDENT AUDITING OF PRECLEARS Students may not audit for their Classification any current preclear of any organization or any preclear who has been audited in any organization within the past two years. A student's preclear who does not fall into the above two categories, but who has had to have either an assist, a Review session, or a Stabilization Intensive done in any organization due to the student classification lines is still considered the student's preclear and is not considered an organizational preclear. A student may not audit another student's preclear without getting a written attestation from the other student that permission is granted for the preclear to be audited. A student is held responsible for abiding by this policy. Further the technology, Ethics, and Policies as regards auditing of preclears applies fully to a student's auditing of his or her preclear. Written by a Board of Investigation: Marilynn Routsong Joan Thomas Mary Sue Hubbard The Guardian WW LRH:jp.rd for Copyright (c) 1967 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard Founder ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 132 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 16 MARCH AD 15 Remimeo (Reissued on 13 September 1967) Academies Students Saint Hill Courses Tech Sec's Hat Qual Sec's Hat Dir of Exams' Hat Student Examiner's Hat Dir of Review Hat Cramming Officer's Hat TRAINING DEPT - DIV IV Supervisor's Hat DEPT OF EXAMS - DIV V All student examiners are to be star checked on this. FURTHER MATERIAL ON STUDY - EXAMINATIONS Progress in study can be inhibited through the usage of a poor system of examination. By asking of questions irrelevant to the material covered and by failing to ensure that the student is fully aware of exactly what question is flunked, the student can be given sufficient losses to slow down his rate of learning and to cause ARC breaks. A misunderstanding comes about in the first instance purely on the basis that the student understood that he was studying a given subject. An irrelevant question asked by an examiner indicates to the student that such an understanding was false or that no basic agreement existed on the subject in the first place. An example of this would be to ask a student of a French language course to give the main historic dates and their significance to Eighteenth Century France. The original understanding was that the student was learning to speak and read French, not to learn the history of France. In Scientology an example of an irrelevant question would be to ask the student to give the distribution of a bulletin. The understanding of the student is that he is there to learn Scientology, its theory and application, not to learn the internal administration of organizational communication lines. A further example would be to ask a Level 11 student a question concerning data and material covered in Level IV. Frequently enough a Supervisor has to cope with a student who has come into Scientology to study the law of Karma or to study sociology or some other previous misconception without adding to the difficulties by asking irrelevant questions. Knowing what we now know about study we can handle earlier misconceptions, but a Supervisor must never ask a question of a student which is irrelevant to the subject or level. We must ourselves be careful not to add to student confusion. Therefore, any Supervisor tendency to ask irrelevant questions must be firmly restrained. In the second instance of the unknown question, a student can be given a verbal question on which he is flunked. In most cases the student will not be able to remember the question asked as he would not have flunked it in the first case if he had not already failed to understand the material covered by the question. Failure to remember the question asked or a Supervisor's refusal to give him the question asked reacts upon the student as an unanswered question, and therefore an uncompleted communication cycle, but also as an unknown question. The student will ARC break. You can easily demonstrate this by mumbling a question which is not clear enough to be understood and then insist upon an answer. You will soon enough have a very upset person on your hands. This is what happens when a student is asked a question, flunked, and then not given to clearly understand the question asked. Therefore Ron now requires that any examiner must always write down *verbal questions asked before asking them, and when a student flunks, hand him the written question which he flunked The student will then be able to know what he didn't know and be able to look up the material and 133 clear up what it was that he had not understood. Further, this will enable him to complete the communication cycle. If tape examinations are addressed to a class as a whole, these questions must be posted and the examination papers returned to the student. The student can then see what it was that he missed and what question was missed. Many people have had experience of such poor systems of examination which failed to follow the above. It is common practice in universities not only not to give students the questions asked, but also never to return examination papers. Most frequently all the university student is given is a grade. If that grade is not 100%, then the student never knows what it was he didn't know and so can not look it up to know it. This leaves him in the uncertain condition of insecurity about his data on a particular subject. And if the student flunks the subject and has to re-take it, he cannot comfortably study the subject because the whole of the subject has now become a complete mystery to him. Thus, the subject is set up as an ARC Break. Universities probably do this to be sure that their examinations do not get out to students, but then one can only state that this is laziness or lack of ability on the part of professors to think of different questions, or perhaps even a professor's own lack of understanding of his subject sufficient to enable him to be able to think of enough questions to ask. It also could be that there is -a complete lack of worthwhile material in more primitive subjects than Scientology on which to ask questions, in which case it should never have been part of the curriculum. (Freudians mainly examine on the dates of Freud's papers for their qualification of psychiatrists!) The administration of a proper system of examination is quite simple: I . Tape examinations or examination questions given verbally to the class as a whole must be written down before being asked and must be posted on a bulletin board afterwards and all examination papers must be returned to the students. 2. Verbal questions asked of individual students must be noted down in a book like an invoice book with tear-out sheets and a piece of carbon paper. Such books are easily procured from stationers as they are used in most stores. The student is given the yellow copy of the questions with the flunked question plainly marked. The white copy is placed in the examiner's folder for the bulletin, tape or material. In this fashion we will be able to collect good questions to be asked; to notice fundamental areas of mis-understanding individual students have; and to note any areas of misunderstanding which are broadly mis-understood. We can, therefore, see where the individual student needs help and see where it is necessary to elaborate more fully on certain technical data in order to make it more broadly comprehensible. Supervisors and examiners doing this will then be contributing to the more rapid progress of individual students and to students in general. The same principles apply to the Department of Examinations and any other student examinations given. Mary Sue Hubbard LRH:ml.jp.rd The Guardian WW Copyright (c) 1965, 1967 for by L. Ron Hubbard L. RON HUBBARD ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Founder [Note: In the original 1965 issue, the last two lines given here were a footnote added by LRH and read "HCO BOARD OF REVIEW. The same principles apply to HCO Board of Review Examinations and examiners." This 1967 issue changed "Instructor" to "Supervisor" throughout.] 134 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 22 SEPTEMBER 1967 Tech Hats Qual Hats SOLO AUDITING FOLDERS After completion of the student's solo auditing requirements his auditing folder is not to be given to the student to take away or keep as it is the record of a student's Grade VI auditing and as such must remain at Saint Hill. The folder must be filed safely at Saint Hill by Technical Services as the folder contains confidential data and also could at some later date be needed for reason of review of the Grade. A student's solo audit course examinations may not be given to the student to take home but must be kept in the Qualifications Division Dept of Examinations. The examination is handed back to the student after the examination has taken place for reference but must always be promptly returned. - It is the responsibility of the examiner to see that Level VI exam sheets are returned by the student. Written by a Board of Investigation: Chairman - Monica Quirino Secretary - Dalene Regenass Member - David Ziff Mary Sue Hubbard LRH:jp.rd The Guardian WW Copyright(c) 1967 for by L. Ron Hubbard L. RON HUBBARD ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Founder HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 2 DECEMBER 1968 Issue II Remimeo EXAMINATIONS No examination may be given to any student of any Course which has not been approved by the Qual See WW who must be a Class VIII Auditor. The Qual See WW may not approve any exam which does not comply with the following two points: (a) Questions asked must be taken from the data on that level and no other. (b) The answer to these questions must be taken from the HCO Bulletins, HCO Policy Letters, or LRH tapes of that level and the date and name of the HCO Bulletin, HCO Policy Letter or LRH tape must be quoted in the answer sheet so that if the student flunks that question he can be referred to the exact source of the correct answer. Philip Quirino CS-5 Tech and Qual Aide LRH:ei.rd for Copyright(c) 1968 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard Founder ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 135 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, Fast Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 13 JANUARY 1969 Remimeo Tech & Qual Hats All Students STANDARD EXAMINATIONS It has occurred that on a practical (Classification) examiner took the place of the doll in the examination. This is out tech as such a thing can cause an overrun of a process. Because of this dolls are used and have been for several years. Therefore, so that it is well known to students and examiners the following is the procedure for Provisional Certification and Provisional Classification Exams. Provisional Certification Exam-This is a written test taken from HCOBs, tapes, Policy Letters of the theory material the student studies. This test examines the student to ensure the student knows the data. 85% is passing grade. Below 85% is a flunk and the student goes to Cramming. Provisional Classification Exam-This is a practical exam. The test consists of a check out of TR 0-4 any of the meter drills of the level, and the auditing of a doll on the process or processes of that level with full TRs and Admin. The examiner gives the student a mock C/S and the student Audits the doll on that C/S. The student is required to pass this exam 100%. The student is flunked for out TRs, out meter drills, out admin, or out tech only. FURTHER TO THE ABOVE AN EXAMINER MAY NOT ANSWER ANY TECHNICAL QUESTION OF THE STUDENT BUT MAY ONLY REFER HIM TO THE PROPER HCOB OR LRH TAPE OR TR OR HCO POLICY LETTER. The student is examined on a standard. That standard is the exact duplication and application of the technical data of HCO Bulletins, LRH tapes, TRS, and meter drills. The student is not expected to handle situations above his level of abilities, but he is expected to recognize the phenomena indicating that situation has arisen that he can not handle. Nobody expects a Dianetic student to handle an ARC Broken pc but we do expect him to be able to recognize the situation and to see that it is handled by a more qualified Auditor. The Classification exam will only be difficult and impossible to pass for the non standard auditor. That's what it's aimed at-Ensuring that the auditor is a standard auditor at any level. The Founder-L. Ron Hubbard has spent years and years sorting it out and showing us the road out. Qual's job is to ensure that road remains straight, standard and true so that those who follow will also make it out. STANDARD TECH will keep it straight. Lt. O.J. Roos Flag C/S W/O P.D. Quirino LRH:PDQ:OJR:sdp.ei.cden CS-5 Copyright (c) 1969 for by L. Ron Hubbard L. RON HUBBARD ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Founder [Cancelled by HCO P/L 29 July 1972 Issue II, Fast Flow in Training, in the 1972 Year Book.] 136 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 5 MAY 1969 Issue II Remimeo Dianetic Course Qual Secs Tech Secs DIANETIC COURSE EXAMINATIONS There are two examinations on the Dianetics Course. I . PRE-AUDITING EXAMINATION. This is done after the student has completed the theory and practical drill sections of the course. The examination is standard and has been written up and issued to all Qualifications Divisions in Orgs. It must be passed 100% before the student is permitted to audit. As Dianetics is now a very standard routine it will be found that the student either understands it or he doesn't. There are no shades of grey. If the student flunks the examination he goes to Cramming to review the materials of the course. 2. FINAL EXAMINATION. This is done after the student has completed his auditing requirements. When the 25 hours of auditing are complete (or more if required to obtain the required result), the student presents all his auditing folders to the Examiner with an attestation that he was the auditor, and that all the sessions he audited have been recorded in the folders presented to the Examiner. The Examiner inspects the folders to see if the auditor has demonstrated the practice of Standard Dianetics and to see if the PC has attained the expected gains. (If the sessions look standard but the PC has not attained the expected gains the examiner knows the session reports are incomplete or false.) If the Examiner is satisfied the student is auditing 100% Standard Dianetics the student is passed and graduated. If the auditing is non-standard and the results have not been obtained the student must continue auditing until the Examiner is satisfied. The student auditor's sessions are case supervised. If the PC is in trouble the auditor ends the session and sends the PC to the examiner. The case supervisor orders the, student to cramming if he has goofed. The PC may be ordered to a Scientology Review such as a Green Form. Review and cramming are at normal Org rates. There is no charge for case supervision. Brian Livingston LRH:BL:cs.ei.rd CS-5 Copyright (c) 1969 for by L. Ron Hubbard L. RON HUBBARD ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Founder [Cancelled by HCO P/L 29 July 1972 Issue II, Fast Flow in Training, in the 1972 Year Book.] 137 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 24 JUNE 1969 Remimeo Examiners DIANETICS PRE-AUDITING EXAMINATION Confidential HCO Policy Letter of 5 May 1969 Pre-Auditing Examination is cancelled. The pre-auditing examination consists only of a tough written examination which must be passed 100% before the student is permitted to audit. After a period the current written examinations will become too well known, also some students may flunk the exam several times before eventually passing with 100%, hence more examinations will need to be written from time to time. These should be originated as necessary by the Qual Sec WW or, under his direction, by some competent person who is a Dianetic Graduate. All examinations must consult the student's understanding and ability to relate the materials to a session. Sometimes a student will get high marks in the nineties and only lost marks for an incomplete answer rather than incorrect answers. In such cases the examiner after marking the paper can verbally ask the student the questions on which he lost marks. If the student then gives the missing data, without having referred to the materials or discussed the examination with somebody in the mean time, he passes. This opportunity is not given if the student answered any question incorrectly or had less than about 94% on first marking. The purpose of the examination is to find out if the student knows and understands the materials cold. If he doesn't he will mess up cases. The student who flunks the examination or auditing goes to Cramming and then back to course to re-do the full course. THE ENTIRE PURPOSE OF THIS EXAM IS TO PREVENT THE MESSED UP PCS WE FIND OCCURRING WHEN THIS QUALIFICATION TO AUDIT EXAM IS OMITTED. Brian Livingston CS-5 for LRH:BL:eky.ei.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright (c) 1969 Founder by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [Cancelled by HCO P/L 29 July 1972 Issue II, Fast Flow in Training, in the 1972 Year Book.] 138 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 21 NOVEMBER 1971 Remimeo Examiners All Qual Personnel Ethics Officers SCIENTOLOGY COURSES EXAMINATION POLICY (Addition to HCO P/L 8 March 66 HIGH CRIME) (Effective I February 1972) As it has not been previously explicitly stated it now becomes firm policy that anyone examining a student for certification on a Scientology Course, not just Technical courses but administrative as well, e.g. SS 1, SS 2, OEC, FEBC, etc, must have been starrated first on the Policies and related HCO Bulletins or other issues in Qual before writing or grading exams. I Not to do so has been found to cause upset on student lines through poor examinations and does not guarantee the Organization is producing a Quality Product. Not to have this HCO P/L in effect by I February 1972 will be deemed a High Crime. Committee of Evidence FCO 1611 for L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:PM:IC:JAAF:HH:CR:nt.rd Copyright (c) 1971 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 139 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 2 APRIL 1965 Remimeo Board of Review Division 3 Dept 12 Department of Qualifications Board of Review Hat METER CHECKS For passing a Class VI auditing requirement for classification at Level VI, a check must be done on the E-Meter and the following qualifications concerning the TA must be observed: 4.0 to 2.0 - acceptable as passing 4.0 - that is alright 4.5 - barely passing 5.0 - absolutely not passing Below 2.0 - not acceptable as passing The E-Meter used for the checkout must have its Tone Arm properly calibrated with a 12,500 ohm resistor and a 5,000 ohm resistor hooked between the exact cans which the student will hold during the check. The student is not audited or spoken to during this check but is simply put on the meter and the meter condition noted and written down which is the end of the check. RELEASE CHECK For a release (formerly keyed-out Clear) check, the TA position may be anything from 2.0 to 3.0 with a floating needle. There is no other test of any kind for a release. The E-Meter on which the test is conducted must be calibrated as above. Note that this is the old "clear test". It now is classified as a RELEASE. GRADE VI CLEAR TEST For a clear checkout, there must be no reaction on the needle. The needle must be completely free with the Tone Arm at clear read for the sex of the person being tested. The needle can be made to impulse with the body totally motionless, hands steady, and no tricks. Further the needle can also be shoved from one side of the dial to the other by the clear by looking at it. Records must be presented showing that all R-6 materials have been run and no other characteristics or phenomena are required or demanded of the GRADE VI CLEAR (this state is referred to in earlier literature as Theta Clear and has been loosely referred to more recently as OT, but the state of OT is not actually attained without the drills and practices which were more-or-less covered in 1953 as Route One. The state of Clear (Book One and all other definitions) is totally attained at GRADE VI). GRADE CHECKS Grade checks require no meter test and consist of an inspection of the case folder looking for any TA action left on processes and not flattened. If unflattened processes are found in the folder of the grade being tested, they must be flattened by the auditor and the preclear returned. 140 When the preclear's auditing reports are not available and the preclear asserts and maintains that the processes at a grade have been flattened on him, discuss with the preclear the name of the grade as a subject (which names are on any org board, above the various departments) and see if the preclear seems to have attained it. Then put the preclear on the E-Meter and see if the TA is abnormally high or the needle sticking or dirty or rockslamming. If one of the latter is found to be the state of the needle, "the proper procedure is direct that the preclear be cleaned up by an auditor who must run each process of the grade in question in turn briefly to see if the process develops TA, and if it does, auditor must run the process until the TA action is out of the process". However, the Board of Review passes the matter to the Department of Inspections which directs the above repair be made. It may assist the Dept of Inspections if the Board of Review makes the above repair action (in quotes) known in a note on the folder merely saying the above. It is unlawful for the Board of Review to pass the matter directly back to the HGC or Academy, just as it is unlawful for the post of the Director of Inspections (Div 4, Dept 13) to be held by anyone from the Academy, the HGC, or the Department of Qualifications. Care must be taken in Grade testing not to invalidate the preclear's actual gains as that may produce a Dirty Needle or even an RS. The possession of a grade certificate from an org junior to that of the Board of Review is never accepted on its face value, but the preclear is always checked as above. LRH:wmc.eden L. RON HUBBARD Copyright(c) 1965 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 28 APRIL 1965 Issue III Gen Non Remimeo [Excerpt] All Orgs Sthil Staff Sthil Students ROUTING No student or pc may leave an org by any other exit than through the Department of Examinations. If students or pcs, fail for any reason to be up to required standards they are shunted by Examinations to Review. If the student or pc passes the Department of Examinations' appraisal, he or she is sent to the Department of Certifications for attestation of attainment and for logging out of the org. Until so logged the student or pc has not technically left the org. Departure without logging is "Departure unauthorized" and is treated as a "blow" and passes into the hands of Ethics at once. LRH:ml.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright (c) 1965 by L. Ron Hubbard [Excerpted from HCO Policy Letter of 28 April 1965 Issue III, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Power Processes. A complete copy can be found on page 343.] 141 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 9 JULY 1965 Gen Non-Remimeo Tech Div Qual Div QUAL GOOFS The Examiner in Dept of Examinations can goof on examining pcs sent for declare release by not abiding by policy of his role in this. The Examiner just looks at the pc. He does not examine the folder or put pc on a meter. That's all been done. He just looks at the pc Pc seems bright, then he passes; pc gloomy, he sends to Review. The point is contained in the Fast Flow System. You don't check lines until there's something wrong with them. You don't try to find things wrong as the first action. The Examiner must have a reality on other hats and not try to wear them all. An Examiner can ARC Break a new release or rehabilitated release all to pieces before the person is so declared, by being nosey and suspicious. The pc is enroute to Certs and Awards. The Examiner stop is just a glance for a Release of any kind. It operates like a refusal to ack if the Examiner goes nosey at this point. REVIEW HOLDS Review must NOT hold on to pcs. There is no 2nd HGC in Review. Review does the required actions and sends pc back to HGC admin. There's no reason to start running intensives in Review. That's for the HGC. Check them, find what's wrong, send them back to HGC. The Case Supervisor of course receives the folder from HGC Admin before the next session. But Review does not ask the Case Supervisor for further directions. Review asks the Dir Review and the Dir Review asks the Qual See if needed. But there should be no question on a case. Review actions are very pattern. They do a form. They put it in the folder and send the folder and pc back to HGC Admin. HGC Admin then sends the folder to the Case Supervisor who writes the Case Supervisor's instructions in the folder for the HGC Auditor, who then goes on with the intensive. If the intensive is considered over, by reason of Release or Ethics action, HGC Admin tells the pc and does the remaining necessary actions. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:ml.kd Copyright (c) 1965 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 142 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 5 AUGUST 1965 Remimeo Examiner Hats QUAL DIV TECH DIV RELEASE CHECK OUTS Supersedes Former Policy As many auditors can't tell a floating needle from a fence post, the Examiner is going to get a lot of false declares unless he uses a meter on every pc that comes by. ALWAYS USE A METER IN PC EXAMINATION. Examiners should use a meter briefly on a pc to ascertain the needle character and TA position before declaring. The Examiner doesn't audit the pc He wants to see the TA, the needle, the folder, and wants to know if the pc thinks he or she is a Release. A disease gets amongst auditors called Perfunctoryitis. They see a floating needle in every blowdown (when, of course, the needle does behave loosely for the moment during the blowdown). As a result such an auditor runs a process to a blowdown and says "Floating Needle". The reverse disease, Needleblinditis, more frequently occurs. The auditor never sees a floating needle and plows right on by it. This, of the two diseases, is the worst and most prevalent so probably happens most often. Overrun was the main auditor fault in the last 15 years. This is detected by high TA right during or after a Declare request. The auditor plowed on. The floating needle did occur, wasn't seen. Thus the Examiner must use a meter. And he must be suspicious of "the electric shocked pc who went Release in 20 minutes" on 0-0. Or the pc who "ran R6EW to 4th Stage Release in I hour". DECLARE BY THE NUMBERS Declare Releases in Consecutive Numbers only. Don't declare a Ist Stage next a 4th Stage. Declare a Ist Stage a Second Stage only when the Power Processes have been run. An R6EW floating needle on a pc who has been a first stage only doesn't make a 4th Stage Release. If you later run the Power Processes the R6EW may blow off as a lock on Power Processes (as it has done many times on pcs, while I was Power Process Case Supervisor). Thus the first stage who goes free needle on R6EWis not then a 4th Stage Release. He is not a second stage either. He's a I st Stage plus if you want to call it something. At this time when we have had people on R6EW who were not I st Stage Release, and when we haven't followed the gradient, there are going to be mix ups. We'll just have to cope. But for the Examiner, it is the rule to go by the numbers. Process by the numbers I st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th. Examine and Declare by the numbers. Don't skip. Usually trouble occurs when a Release has been overrun. The TA goes up. In fact this is the best reason for TAs going up. People with high TAs I for I have been found by me to be former releases or have been overrun on upper stage release processes. 143 Therefore a HIGH TA is always marked as overrun of some former release state either on that very process or at some earlier time and the Examiner's order is, for all high TAs who have been audited, when they come to Examiner, "To Review: Rehabilitate former release." If the pc has been declared and the pc Roller Coasters and the TA goes up, send to Ethics as PTS-and be cross if Ethics gets "reasonable" about the pc and says "pc won't disconnect" or "not PTS". For Ethics has goofed in not finding the right suppressive. A Roller Coaster is a Roller Coaster. Only a PTS situation can cause Roller Coaster. And the TA goes up. So, in any event, a high TA is "To Review" or "To Ethics", usually Review unless a Roller Coaster is evident. A below 2 TA is never declared anything. Only Power Process 6 will raise a low TA case above 2. That's the total datum and it's factual. Only Power Process 6 raises a low TA case. No other process ever has permanently. A pc whose Tone Arm is between 2 and 3 and whose needle "floated" for the auditor and not for the Examiner has been overrun or underrun. It's a matter for Review to find out. But it's only those two, overrun or underrun. If the TA then goes up higher in Review it's always an overrun. If the TA stays in the same range (2 to 3) in Review it's definitely an underrun; to wit, the needle didn't float for the auditor at all. Don't be afraid to put a pc on a meter when you're an examiner. Floating needles aren't all that tender. On first and second stage releases the TA goes up late at night and may be higher in the morning. But the message here is that they can be gently examined by an Examiner. Just put the pc on a meter. If released in the last few hours, the needle will always be floating if it floated for the auditor and the auditor stopped. If it isn't floating for the Examiner and the TA is between 2 to 3, it didn't float for the auditor either. EXCEPTION Because 2nd Stage Release by Power Processing is a phenomenon, not a floating needle necessarily, a pc's needle may not be floating after ending Pr Pr 6. Floating needle is not an absolute requirement for Pr Pr 6 2nd Stage Release. But it's nice when the needle is found to be floating. The auditor rightly tries to be sure and may overrun a trifle. It's hard not to. And so declaring 2nd Stage is chancy and may not stick. The pc may have to have a further run if the needle did not float and the TA is still between 2 and 3. Be alert, Examiners. This is a delicate job of course. But it can be done correctly. A former release supposedly rehabilitated will have a floating needle at least for a day or two. If they don't have a floating needle, require further rehabilitation. First and foremost, know what a floating needle is. Once seen, you never mistake one. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mh.rd Copyright (c) 1965 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 144 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 AUGUST 1965 Gen Non Remimeo Examiner Hat QUAL DIV FLOATING NEEDLE ON FORMER RELEASES As Former Releases have sometimes been overrun to such an extent that it is very hard to turn the floating needle back on it is not an absolute must that the Examiner find a floating needle on Former Releases sent to Declare. The Examiner may declare a Former Release without seeing a floating needle if other data substantiates it well, and the Rehabilitation has been carried out by HCO B 30 June 65 technology (and as followed by other HCO Bs in this series). L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mh.rd Copyright (c) 1965 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 9 AUGUST 1965 Addendum to HCO Policy Letter of 5 August 1965, Qual Div, Tech Div Remimeo Examiner Hats RELEASE CHECK OUTS The Examiner must also do the meter check of floating needle on students sent to Review for Assists, in which Review the Assist was ended on a 'floating needle' or any other action in which the Review action is ended on a 'floating needle'. Review Officer and Examiner please note,, that if the person being Reviewed for whatever reason, has reads and/or answers on the part of the Review Form having to do with Ethics, HE OR SHE MUST BE SENT TO ETHICS, WHETHER THE QUESTION CLEANS OR NOT, AND WHETHER THE REVIEW ENDS IN A FLOATING NEEDLE OR NOT. Also, any Release of any stage who shows up in Review for an Assist is suspect of rollercoastering, so be alert. Roller-coasters are sent to Ethics. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:ml.bp.rd Copyright (c) 1965 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 145 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 19 OCTOBER 1965 Gen Non-Remimeo Tech Div Qual Div RELEASE DECLARATIONS Any untrained person may not be declared at a grade of Release higher than that to which Power Processing will take him, namely Grade VA, and no one may be declared Grade VI Release or above who has not been properly trained in the skills of solo auditing at Saint Hill. Also, a person who has trained to Level VI but not been audited up through the grades, and so cannot do solo auditing on Class VI (Clearing Course) materials, may only be classed as Prov Class VI. Before being permitted to engage on the processes of solo auditing (the first being R6 EW), all students in Training will have to be released on the Power Processes, in order to ensure a successful passage through the higher levels. There will be cases such as those which are handled by SEC ED 122 SH on which Power Processing may not be a prerequisite to higher level Training and materials, but each such case will be handled on its own merits. LRH:ml.kd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright (c) 1965 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex Remimeo HCO POLICY LETTER OF 22 OCTOBER 1965 Qual Div Tech Div Sthil Students REQUIREMENTS FOR STUDENT CLASSIFICATION HCO B of 27 September 1965 "Release Gradation" states "It is obvious then that GRADE CERTIFICATES FOR PRECLEARS lapse and are no longer issued and are replaced by Release awards, awarding "Grade - Release" when attained. HCO Policy Letter 31 July 1965 "Purposes of the Qualifications Division" states that the prime purpose of the Dept of Examinations and all its sections and units is: "TO HELP RON ENSURE THAT THE TECHNICAL RESULTS OF THE ORGANIZATION ARE EXCELLENT AND CONSISTENT, THAT STUDENTS AND PRECLEARS ARE WITHOUT FLAW FOR THEIR SKILL OR STATE WHEN PASSED AND THAT ANY TECHNICAL DEFICIENCY OF ORG PERSONNEL IS REPORTED AND HANDLED SO THAT THE TECHNICAL RESULTS OF THE ORGANIZATION CONTINUE TO BE EXCELLENT AND CONSISTENT." "The integrity of Scientology and its hope for beings in this Universe are entrusted to the Department of Examinations." Because of the above it becomes necessary that students in training present their preclears to the Examiner to be declared at the grade of Release attained if a floating needle is attested by the student auditor. Even if a floating needle is not obtained students should still present their preclear to the Examiner for her to observe that good indicators are in on the pc Provision for this is made on the Night Foundation and in cases where the preclear works at night and cannot be presented to the Examiner, special representation may be made to the Examiner and the matter will be individually handled. LRH:ml.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright (c) 196S by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 146 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 NOVEMBER 1966 Remimeo Clearing Course Students Clearing Course Personnel Clear Checkers Div Organizer Qual WW CLEAR CHECK-OUTS IN CONTINENTAL ORGS The Clearing Course is available ONLY at Saint Hill. However, a student who comes to Saint Hill to enrol in and start the Clearing Course may then return to his home and continue it by correspondence. He may then, when Clear, obtain a Clear Check at his appointed Continental Organization. In order to speed up the checking out of Clears residing in other countries and to handle the tremendous flow of Clears that is occurring, and in the interest of economy for students, personnel have been appointed in certain Continental Orgs to perform this duty. When an overseas student sends in his folder to the Clearing Course Supervisor WW requesting a Clear Check the Clearing Course Supervisor examines the folder, and if satisfied that the student is ready for a Clear Check, initiates a Routing Form for a Continental Clear Check. This routing form then goes airmail immediately with the student's complete folder to the Continental Clear Checker concerned and the Clearing Course Supervisor at the same time writes to the student informing him that he will be contacted by the Continental Clear Checker. The Continental Clear Checker, upon receipt of the routing form and folder, telegraphs the student to come in for a Clear Check. Upon arrival at the Continental Org an amount of 927.0.0 (or the equivalent in local currency) must be paid in to the Area Cashier by the student. f 12.0.0 must be transferred IMMEDIATELY to Saint Hill to cover the postage and handling costs that have been incurred in airmailing the student's complete folder to the Continental Organization and L12.0.0 is retained to cover the Continental Org's expenses in returning the folder to Saint Hill. Balance of L3.0.0 comprises the Continental Organization's Clear Check fee. When the Checkout has been completed and the student has been announced Clear, a cable is sent to the Clearing Course Supervisor WW announcing the following facts: 1. Name of Clear. 2. TA position. 3. Where the Clear received his early training. The Continental Clear Check routing form is then completed and sent to the Clearing Course Supervisor WW complete with the student's complete folder and all reports and materials used in the Checkout. Every Continental Clear Checker must have completed the following steps before being allowed to check out a Clear: I . Checked out thoroughly on all Clearing Course Tech Materials. 2. Checked out on the Clearing Course remedies. 3. Checked out on the Clear Check Hat. Training of a Clear Checker is done under the Supervision of the Divisional Organizer, Qual WW. Having been chocked out Clear, if the person is invited on the OT Course Part One, enrollment can be handled by mail from Saint Hill. LRH.jd.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright(c) 1966 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 147 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 13 SEPTEMBER 1967 (Amends HCO Policy Letter of 6 September 1967) Remimeo Div 5 SH Advance Course Supers Clear Checkers CLEAR CHECK OUTS All former check out procedures for Clear are cancelled. The check out hereafter shall consist of I . Has run the materials of the Clearing Course to free needle. 2. Is the person's TA between 2 and 3 with a loose or flowing needle? 3. Rehabbing ALL grades from Dianetic Release up to Clear, making sure they have actually, each one, been run and attained. 4. A marked change in the person. 5. Is the person cheerful and happy about being Clear? No person may be declared Clear who has a bad Ethics record which demonstrates suppressiveness. He can be told he is Clear but the Clear cert must be sent to the Ethics Officer who holds it for 6 months pending any new symptoms of suppressiveness. The person meanwhile may enroll on Advanced Courses but it must be plainly noted he is a "Pending Clear Cert". No person may be declared Clear who asserts he is not or asserts a psychosomatic worsening of body as a result of "being Clear". Calling out things to a person in a Clear check is forbidden. Anyone using this order to suppress or invalidate Clears or the state thereof or stop Clearing is liable to heavy Ethics penalties as Suppressive. Any declared Clear before this date who subsequently developed an Ethics record is to be stricken from the list of Clears. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:jp.rd Copyright (c) 1967 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED (Note: The amendment was the addition of point 1.] [Cancelled by HCO P/L 9 January 1968, page 154.1 148 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 15 SEPTEMBER 1967 Remimeo HCO Exec Secs all orgs URGENT Div 5 Dept 13 Div 2 Dept 6 Div I Dept 3 RELEASE AND CLEAR CHECK OUTS (Effective date 15 Oct 67) As an org can only have a soaring clear and release check out graph and a level non-advancing income graph IF THE CHECK OUTS ARE BAD AND NON FACTUAL the following policy is implemented: NO CERTIFICATE DECLARING ANY GRADE OF RELEASE OR THE STATE OF CLEAR OR ANY STATE OF OT IS VALID UNLESS THE EXAMINER IS A CLEAR CHECKED OUT AS PER POLICY LETTER OF 13 SEPTEMBER 1967, "CLEAR CHECK OUTS", AND WHO IS AN SHSBC GRADUATE. . No check outs not so done will be considered valid and only check outs so done may be graphed. For a long time I was puzzled as to how an org could be checking people out for release at a high rate and yet have no advance in income. Truly released persons pay their bills and flood in for more service. Finally I found out how this could be-the check outs for release were nonfactual or suppressively done or were an evaluation the person did not accept. Pcs so treated do not pay their bills or enroll for training. Looking further I found the key point in an org persons of suppressive tendencies would monopolize would be EXAMINER DEPT 13. This is the weak point in any org. It can undo all the tech of Div 4 (or hide its bad tech) and undo all the Admin skill of Div 7 without any real signs appearing except down income. An examiner can force a grade off on a pc or refuse a grade the pc has attained and directly stop the willingness of the person to have further courses or processing. Academy enrollment would also collapse if the Examiner Post was awry as persons properly declared then want to be trained. In an enthusiasm to get a high graph orgs will turn a blind eye to misdeclares. YET THE ONLY TROU13LE I HAVE HAD WITH PERSONNEL OF RECENT MONTHS HAS COME ONLY FROM MISDECLARES. People who are declared VI who have never had III or IV run, who had Clear grade forced on them, who in general had not been properly advanced or declared, have been the ONLY ones who gave us trouble. This is so much the case that an Ethics Officer should always suspect misdeclare in a trouble-maker. When people are properly examined and the exact finding made all their good indicators come in EVEN WHEN REFUSED A GRADE NOT ATTAINED. A suppressively inclined (or badly trained) auditor sitting on the examiner post 149 can make people think we are dishonest with his or her misdeclares. This post is the post that requires the greatest honesty in Scientology. If at this time, clears were put on Dept 13 or did its work and all declares of the past year were re-examined, the income of the org would soar. The ARC Break Registrar will find that misdeclares are a hidden factor in many people who aren't re-enrolling as students or paying their bills. The thing to do with these misdeclares is to bring them in for re-examination and give them the CORRECT finding on their grades, good or bad. They made it or they didn't. The TRUTH brings in their good indicators. A whole area can be wrecked by someone who believes that only awarding certs whether earned or not will make people happy. It doesn't. Only HONEST and FACTUAL examination will make people happy. Also when the Examiner says a grade has been attained that has not bad tech is validated in Div 4 AND ALL CHECK ON DIV 4 IS LOST TO THE EXEC SECS AND BAD TECH BECOMES THE RULE. This must not be. The Examiner is there to make Div 4 be good. So when you see a "number of releases and clears" statistic soaring and income remaining the same, you know what is happening. EXAMINERS ARE NOT BEING SKILLED OR HONEST. Only skilled and honest examinations with the real result announced to the pc will make the income graph soar. Our grades of release are factual. They exist. They are not some commercial gimmick or a means of magic incantation by the Examiner to make a district "happy". You can wreck an area by declaring people who haven't made it. You can wreck an area by refusing to declare people who have made it. All it takes is an HONEST examiner. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:jp.cden Copyright (c) 1967 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [Note: See HCO P/L 2 March 1968, Qual Sec Must Be Clear, page 74, which modifies requirement in paragraph 2.1 150 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 15 SEPTEMBER 1967 Issue II Remimeo Div 3 Dept 8 Div 5 Dept 13 EXAMINER BONUSES (Effective 15 Oct 67) (Cancels any and all local or Pol Ltr or ED Examiner Bonuses) The Clear who is chosen as an Examiner in the Pol Ltr Issue I of this date is entitled to the following bonuses on preclears only (not Academy students study awards): For every Correct examination for grade for any grade of release or Clear, whether passed or failed by the pc the Examiner shall receive personally the sum of L1 or $2.50 US or similar sum in other currencies of an even amount. If at any time within 90 days after examination the examination is found to be incorrect the Examiner shall pay the org L5 or $12.50 or similar sum but always 5 times the examination fee received. The sum is paid by the Org not the pc and is paid for any declaration examination including multiple declares. The 5 times fine is paid to the org not to any person. The examination fee is paid even when the org offers free examination. It is free to the public but the org pays the Examiner. The fee is paid (or 5 times it is forfeited) on re-examinations also. The Examiner receives the fee regardless of whether the result is a declare or a flunk. If the pc passes and is certified in grade or if the pc does not pass and is not certified makes no difference-the fee is still paid. The forfeit for a misdeclare or failure to declare is paid by the Examiner if he declares a pc to have made it who has not or who fails to declare a pc who has made it. Either one is an INCORRECT examination. The way an Examination is found to be incorrect is if the pc, within 90 days: 1. Becomes the subject of an Ethics Order of any kind; or 2. Fails to carry on with further processing or fails to signify he is going to; or 3. Does not signify his intention to get training or further training; or 4. Becomes the subject of a review for case; or 5. Is found by a board to have been the subject of an examination leading to an incorrect result; or 6. Goes out of comm with the org. If the pc by any subsequent Examiner at the next or higher grade or grades is found to have been incorrectly declared or incorrectly denied a declare, at ANY FUTURE DATE, the Examiner who did the incorrect examination shall pay the forfeit to the org. The Examiner threatened with such a penalty by reason of this paragraph only, may ask for a Board of Investigation on the matter. The full intent of this policy letter is to make it worthwhile for an Examiner to make a completely honest examination without regard to anyone's statistic and to be immune from any pressure to declare or not declare, the whole repute of Scientology depending as it does in HONEST examination. This system is also aimed to make it worthwhile for a Clear to be an Examiner and provide adequate reward for same. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:jp.bp.cden Founder Copyright 1'-~ 1967 by L. ROD Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 151 NOT HCO POLICY LETTER CORRECT COLOUR FLASH RED ON WHITE HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 8 OCTOBER 1967 Remimeo CLEAR CHECKS AND RE-CLEAR CHECKS (Reference HCO PL 13 Sept 67) A Clear Check or a Re-Clear Check is done exactly per HCO PL 13 Sept 67, "Clear Check Outs". The first step, CC materials to FN, is a folder inspection. If no FN was noted in the CC folder, the point is rehabbed if it exists. Standard Rehab-date time or times, etc. Materials not run to FN is a flunk. The second step requires the TA between 2 and 3. Proper cans giving full hand contact must be used. Solo cans are NOT used. The meter and cans must be checked out before the check by placing a 500 ohm resistor between the cans, and then a 12500 ohm resistor. The resistor is clipped to the cans, not the leads. Use sensitivity 5 on the Clear and Re-Clear Check. In rehabbing the grades keep in mind HCOB I I Feb 66. "Free Needles How to get them on a Preclear". That is, if a grade does not rehab to FN, go on to the next grade, etc, until you have a FN. Then pick up those that you left. The one really keyed-in will hold down the others. . You do HCOB 30 June 65, 21 July 65, 2 Aug 65, 21 Oct 65 exactly. Listing and dating each and every release on a grade. REMEMBER that a pc may have gone release more than once on a given process, so check for it. You get in all steps and do a proper job of it, getting the pc happy about it before leaving the grade. When you are done you will have isolated the out grades, if any. Such a pc goes to Review to get them put in. You must have down that the grade was RUN. "Have you been run on ARC Breaks, yes, FN, that's it", is incorrect. See 21 Oct 65. What processes were run? - list them-find which went release on, etc. Standard tech. N.B. Straight wire, secondaries, engrams, and Grade Va, do not need to be ran. Their absence does not constitute a flunk. However, if they were run and the pc did not go release, they would naturally have to be completed. But, this is only done IF they were run previously. Some pcs have not been run on Grade V due to ED on old SH grads. Point is, are they whole track engram releases? If not, handle any by-passed charge. DO NOT run Power. Do not run Power on anyone who has run the CC materials. So, on such a pc as falls under this ED, when you get to where you would be rehabbing Grade V, you instead just locate his old track processes, like Helatrobus, Fac One, etc, and find out if he went release. You use your 27 Sept 65 bulletin here-what did the pc look at that got the release-what keyed out . . This determines whether or not he's whole track engram release. For example, pc ran on old Advanced Procedures and Axioms process of go to a moment of occlusion in this lifetime. Bang, he went whole track, a picture of two anthropoids showed up in an electronics incident. The key-out gave the pc a release 152 lasting 3 1/2 years. On rehab, when this electronic was spotted again, there was a great resurgence and FN. During these grade rehabs the TA may go below 2 or above 3. This is OK, you continue the rehabs as you usually would. After rehabs are all done, any out grade is run to FN in Review, excluding those listed above. A person pending an S & (c) does not receive his check until the S & (c) has been completed on the person and Ethics clearance has been given on it. A Clear who acquires an Ethics record of a Crime Level obviously is a misdeclare, and must be put on the usual lines and get a Re-Clear Check, then a complete Review to get in the out grade or grades. This Ethics record must be accurate and proven, not just some chit written which may or may not be true. It is a PROVEN record resulting from a Hearing, Board of Investigation, or Comm Ev. If the record is in question, it must be cleared up before revoking a Clear Certificate. Failure to pass a Re-Clear Check by TA position is meaningless technically because upper Levels key-in after Clear and will move the TA all over the dial and can tighten the needle (tighten, not scratchy). So do not withdraw the Certificate. Continue the check, do rehabs, and get in any out grades in Review. Exams does the check. You get a person cleaned up on whatever you found out so that he can then pass a check. A person who flunks a Clear Check or Re-Clear Check does NOT run the CC materials to another FN before getting another check. If, however, the flunk was because the CC materials had not been run to FN, he would of course do so before another check. LRH:jp.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright (c) 1967 Founder by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 25 SEPTEMBER 1967 Remimeo GRADES ABOVE CLEAR All grades above Clear may be checked only when Clear check already done per current policy. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:jp.rd Founder Copyright (c) 1967 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 153 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 8 NOVEMBER 1967 Remimeo CLEAR CHECKS AND RE-CLEAR CHECKS (reference HCOB of 8 October 1967) In Re-Clear Checks done by Continental Clear Checkers, the folder inspection for FN ("The first step" as per HCOB 8 October 1967) may be done by the Clear Checker, Sea Org, with attestations sent to the Continental Clear Checker who then proceeds with the Re-Clear Check as per standard tech. Janet Guilford Chief Supervisor Advanced Courses Helen Pollen Qual See SH Len Regenass HCO Area See WW Tony Dunleavy Exec Council WW Eunice Ford Ken Delderfield LRH Comm WW Joan McNocher D/Guardian WW Mary Sue Hubbard LRH:jp.aap The Guardian WW Copyright e 1967 for by L. Ron Hubbard L. RON HUBBARD ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Founder HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 9 JANUARY 1968 Remimeo CANCELLATION OF HCO POLICY LETTER OF 12 SEPT 1967 AND HCO POLICY LETTER OF 13 SEPT 1967 HCO Policy Letter 13 September 1967, "Clear Check Outs", and HCO Policy Letter of 12 September 1967, "Clearing and 0. T. Course Regulations, Clearing and O.T Course Supervision", are hereby cancelled as both policies contain inspection before the fact and therefore violate the Fast Flow System of Management. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:jp.rd Copyright 0 1968 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 154 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 13 OCTOBER 1968 Remimeo EXAMINER The whole duty of the examiner is to note the TA needle behaviour of the pc. This duty is done muzzled. No talk or chatter. The pc comes in. The examiner smiles, indicates for the pc to sit down. The examiner hands the pc the cans. Notes the TA needle and looks up at the pc for his statement. When the pc says what he wants the examiner says thank you very much. And indicates with an arm gesture the way out. This is the whole drill. To do, say, anything else will invalidate the pc and or lose the FN he or she got in session. You don't as an examiner care about anything except TA-needle behaviourstatement. The pc will tell you what he wants to. You don't have to ask for it. LRH:ja.ei.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright(c) 1968 Founder by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 11 DECEMBER 1968 Remimeo ADDENDUM TO HCO P/L 13 OCT 1968 EXAMINER If the pc appears to be disturbed by the silence of the examiner-they show this by restlessly shifting in the chair, or talking on and on or trying to get the examiner to talk-it is permissible for the examiner to politely acknowledge the pc's origination. This acknowledgement will make the pc comfortable and he will then give his statement. The examiner never originates anything except to answer a question about himself. Example: Pc: "How are you?" Examiner: "Fine thank you." The whole idea is never invalidate or evaluate for the pc by word, attitude or expression. CS-5 LRH:PQ:Idm.ei.eden.rd Tech & Qual Aide Copyright (c) 1968 for by L. Ron Hubbard L. RON HUBBARD ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Founder 155 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 26 JANUARY AD20 Issue II Remimeo (Revises HCO P/L of 13 Oct '68 Examiner's Hat and I I Dec'68 "Examiner") All Auditors Issue as HCO B also EXAMINER AND FLOATING NEEDLE The whole duty of the Examiner is to note the TA, needle behavior of the pc. This duty is done muzzled. No talk or chatter. The pc comes in. The Examiner smiles, indicates for the pc to sit down. The Examiner hands the pc the cans. Notes the TA, needle and looks up at the pc for his statement. When the pc says what he wants, the Examiner says "Thank you very much." AND INDICATES THE PC HIS FIN IF HE SEES ONE. And indicates with an arm gesture the way out. This is the whole drill. Very rarely, the pc appears to be disturbed by the silence of the Examiner. They show this by restlessly shifting in the chair, or talking on and on, or trying to get the Examiner to talk. It is permissible for the Examiner to politely acknowledge the pc's origination. This acknowledgement will make the pc feel comfortable, To do, say, anything else will invalidate the pc and/or lose the FIN he or she got in session. You don't, as an Examiner, care about anything except TA, needle behavior and indicating FIN if one is observed, statement, pc indicators. The pc will tell you what he wants to. You don't have to ask for it. Stable Datum = Always indicate FIN when you observe one, whether an Examiner, Auditor or pc. Belkacem Ferradj CS-5 for L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:BF:jz.rd Copyright (c) 1970 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 156 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LET-TER OF 28 MARCH 1970 Remimeo All Tech Sees All Qual Secs Adv Courses (Cancels and replaces Class VIII C/S HCO P/L 28 January, 1970 "R6EW and Clear". All references to the Clear Cognition in Dianetics are cancelled and have been deleted.) R6EW AND CLEAR Above VA processes, one enters the field of Advanced Courses. Advanced Courses, specifically R6EW and CC, deal with R6, materials of which one DOES HAVE TO AUDIT in order to attain the stable gains of the grade. In the old R6EW Checksheet, the study background and the process itself were all in one pack. There were possibilities that one would self-audit once he has seen the auditing materials; it was observed that some people factually did self-audit and later on they had to have a patch-up in Review on a grade that wasn't audited in the first place! Well, that is a Non-Standard action to begin with on Advanced Courses. Therefore, we made R6EW materials into 2 packs = study in Div IVs (orgs) and auditing materials are issued at the last minute in Div Vs, as per HCO P/L 4 December 69 "Confidential. Additions and Changes to R6EW Checksheet" (HCO P/L of 2 Oct 69). The liability of self-auditing of the Grade VI got resolved then and the preclears audited the grade with fantastic wins. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY MADE POLICY THAT ONE DOES HAVE TO AUDIT THE GRADE BEFORE HE CAN CLAIM ATTAINMENT OF ITS END PHENOMENA. Specifically in R6EW, where one definitely has to do the solo drills anyway. Grades are Grades = Their End Phenomena is attained by auditing them exactly as per the Scientology Gradation Chart, and that is true of any Grade. That's the stable data. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:kjm.ei.cden Copyright (c) 1970 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 157 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF I I APRIL 1970 Issue II Remimeo Examiner Hats Auditors Case Supervisors REVIEW COMPLETE? When a preclear has completed a Review and the C/S has okayed the preclear as complete, the folders are sent to the Examiner, who asks the preclear: "Are you satisfied that your Review is complete?" If the pc says yes and VGIs flood in and the needle floats broadly the pc may then attest. If the preclear says that he is not satisfied, the Examiner asks: "What specifically did not get handled?" He notes down the answer exactly and routes the folder to the C/S. The C/S then decides if what is needed is further Review action or may route the preclear to sign up for an Intensive in the HGC. Review only corrects. Note that the above actions are taken ONLY after the C/S has written that a Review is complete. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:kjm.ei.rd Copyright (c) 1970 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 358 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 25 JUNE 1970 Remimeo Revised and Reissued 17 July 1970 OES Qual Sec (Cancels HCO PL 6 Apr '70 Issue II Examiner Scientology Release Attestation Form C&A which referred to cancelled HCO PL 14 Mar '68.) EXPANDED LOWER GRADES CHART OF ABILITIES GAINED AND INABILITIES LOST This chart is used by the examiner when a pc is sent for "Declare?" on a grade. The examiner first checks the pc's auditing folder to see that every process of a Grade being attested to has been run to true End Phenomena for each process. He then puts the pc on the meter noting TA and needle behaviour. The pc then makes a statement to the examiner which indicates that the pc actually made the end result of a Grade. The examiner gets the pc to state the ability he has attained: the exact wording of flows 11 2 and 3 of the Grade as given below. The pc may give the exact meaning in his own words, expressed as an ability gained or an inability lost for that Grade. ABILITY GAINED INABILITY LOST GROUP PROCESSES Awareness that change is available. Freedom from unawareness. LIFE REPAIR Awareness of truth and the way to Freedom from no hope for change or personal freedom. future. ARC STRAIGHTWIRE Knows he/she won't get any worse. Freedom from deterioration. DIANETIC CASE COMPLETION Well and happy human being. Freedom from physical pain and mis emotion. GRADE 0, COMMUNICATIONS RELEASE F1: Ability to communicate freely with Fl: Freedom from, or no longer both anyone on any subject. Likes to outflow. ered by communication difficulties. No longer withdrawn and reticent. F2: Willing for others to communicate F2: Lost any resistance to others to him freely on any subject. communicating to him on unpleasant and unwanted subjects. F3: Will permit others to communicate 173: Loss of reaction to others about anything to others. communicating to others. GRADE 1, PROBLEMS RELEASE Fl: Ability to recognise the source of Fl: Has no problems. problems and make them vanish. F2: Feels free about any problems F2: No longer worried about the others have with him and can recognise problems he has been to others. source of them. F3: Free about others problems with or F3: Loss of inability to have others about others and can recognise source of having problems with others. them. 159 GRADE 11, RELIEF RELEASE F1: Ability to be cause without fear of Fl: Relief from the hostilities and hurting others. sufferings of Life. F2: Is willing for others to be cause F2: Freedom from things others have over him. done to him in the past. F3: Is willing for others to be cause F3: Loss of need to protect another over others without feeling the need to from actions of others for fear of them intervene. doing harm. GRADE III, FREEDOM RELEASE F1: Ability to face the future. Ability Fl: Freedom from the upsets of the to experience sudden changes without past. getting upset. F2: Allows others the beingness to be F2: No longer feels he has to change the way they are and choose their own people to make them more acceptable. future; can also cause changes in another's life without ill effect. F3: Is willing for change and interplay F3: Loses the need to try and prevent to occur between others. change occurring among others. GRADE IV, ABILITY RELEASE F1: Ability to do new things. Ability to F1: Moving out of fixed conditions. face life without need to justify own Loss of make guilty mechanisms, self actions, defend self from others. Can be invalidation, and demand for sympathy. right or wrong. F2: Can tolerate the fixed ideas and F2: Freedom from others' fixed ideas, habits of others towards self and does justifications and make-guilty on self. Is not feel the need to respond in a like not intolerant of the habits of others as manner. they affect him. F3: Can tolerate fixed conditions F3: Loss of resistance to another amongst others and does not get making others guilty, asserting self or involved by others' efforts to justify, justifying own overts. dominate or be defensive about their actions against others. EXPANDED RELEASE CONFIRMATION OF EXPANDED LOWER GRADES Knowledge of having fully made Lower Freedom from cruel impulses and from Grades. being Humanoid. Flag Qualifications for L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:JF:RL:dz.kirn.nt.sb.rd Copyright (c) 1970 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [Note: This revision changed the third paragraph by deleting "He then does a meter check for false completion of the Grade being attested" and replaced it with "He then puts the pc on the meter noting TA and needle behaviour."] 160 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 8 SEPTEMBER 1970 Remimeo Qual Div Dept 15 Examiner's Hat E/O Hat Dept 3 Hat EXAMINER'S 24 HOUR RULE A flubbed session is visible at the Examiner. Regardless of the worksheet or report, any session ending with Bad Indicators, above 3.0 TA or below 2.0 with no FIN or an ARC Brk needle, a Stage 4 needle, a rock slam, a stuck needle, still or a dirty needle independent of TA position indicates a non-optimum session. When an Examiner sees any one of these following four manifestations in a pc after a session: I . Non-optimum TA position (above 3, below 2); 2. Non-optimum needle (ARC Brk needle, stage 4, rockslam, stuck, still or dirty); 3. Bad Indicators as per HCOB on Bls; 4. Non-optimurn statement from pc, critical, hostile, belittling, sad, etc. The Examiner applies the 24 Hour Rule. This Rule is: ANY GOOFED SESSION MUST BE REPAIRED WITHIN 24 HOURS. The reason for the rule is that occasionally, particularly when a person has had a sickly life, physical illness will key in after a session goof. Such are purely CIS or auditing flubs. A CIS flub consists of gross violations of case programming. Auditing flubs consist of corny things like running a Rud but no FIN, failure to flatten a Chain, bad TRs, auditing over out-ruds, chopping the pc before full End Phenomena is attained. Evaluation or even chatter after the session can upset a pc that ended session on FIN VGIs. IN ALL CASES as per 1 to 4 above the EXAMINER paper clips a RED CARD on the outside of the FRONT COVER OF THE FOLDER and marks on it THE DATE AND HOUR of the Examination as well as places the EXAM REPORT in the folder, the Examiner logs it in his log in RED BALLPOINT. The EXAMINER must see that the CIS receives this folder as soon as possible. The CIS gives total priority to C/Sing it and it is given priority in auditing that CIS. The pc may even be asked to wait if it can be done in the next hour or two. THE FASTER THE FLUBBED SESSION IS REPAIRED THE EASIER IT IS TO REPAIR. Sessions which are left unrepaired for more than 24 hours occasionally find the pc physically ill. If repaired quickly or at least within 24 hours no physical reaction results. The illness will be a key-in of illnesses the pc often had before any auditing. All the flubbed auditing does is key it in, it itself makes no one ill. If you check folders of ill pcs you will find usually a long period of no-auditing or a flubbed session a few days before the onset of the illness. 161 pcs, who have not been properly programmed but have been audited on random this or that instead of Progress, Advance and Class and Grade Chart to fully completed grades are the most likely to become ill. Penalty for violation of the 24 Hour Rule is loss of a day's stats for the division, the day being that day when the unrepaired flub occurred and subtracted at the time the flub is found. If a flubbed session is found hidden and not disclosed the division loses all its stats for that week. This action is important. If C/Ses and auditors made no flubs whatever they would really be getting top results on pcs. If a division can prove a flubless 100% FIN VGI week of Exam reports to Dept 3 with actual records, it gets a 25 percent stat increase on all stats. LRH:rr.ka.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright (c) 1970 Founder by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 13 JANUARY 1971 Remimeo Qual Div Dept 15 Examiner's Hat E/O Hat Dept 3 Hat EXAM 24 HOUR RULE (Additional Information) When it comes to light that a pc has roller coastered despite an FIN at session end and at Examiner's and if neither Tech nor Qual makes any effort to remedy, then the matter becomes a High Crime. Example: If a pc at the Examiner's F/Ns and yet within a few hours returns for a second Examination with a complaint which does not FIN, then the 24 hour rule applies. If the Tech CIS ignores it and no repair is done within 24 hours by Tech or Qual, both lose their stats for that day. If the matter continues unhandled the matter becomes a High Crime. HIDDEN FAILURES If due to failure to repair or handle session errors or failure to complete a major action, a pc becomes ill or unable to work, and if no effort is made by Tech or Qual to handle, the matter becomes a High Crime under HCO PL 7 Feb 65 reissued 15 June 1970, Keeping Scientology Working, (see Note at the beginning of that Policy Letter) and HCO PL 7 Mar 65, Page 2 No. 3 Crimes: Placing Scientology or Scientologists at risk. In such a case a Comm Ev must be convened and having fixed the cause of neglect and the persons responsible may, in addition to any fines or penalties, cost Tech and Qual all stats and bonuses for a reasonable period following the occurrence as set by the Comm Ev and as refundable by the divisional personnel from future pay. LRH:nt.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright (c) 1971 Founder by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 162 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 8 MARCH 1971 Remimeo Examiner's Hat (Replaces and Revises HCO P/Ls of Tech Services 9 May 69 and 26 Jan AD20, "Exam Form") Hat (Mimeo on 16 Sub paper) EXAMINER'S FORM (Important Note: This form is handled exactly as per HCO P/L of 26 Jan AD20 AND NO EXAMINER MAY EXAMINE UNLESS STARRATED ON THAT P/L, and HCO B 5 Mar 71 (C/S Series 25) AND AN E-METER COURSE. Students and pcs can be very upset if this post's duties are not done correctly and org pc and course results ruined.) After Session Qual Div (Place) Volunteered- Date Medical Time Pc or Pre OT name Last Grade Attained Grade, Course or Action Being Attested Pc's Statement (Write down exactly what pc says.) TA Position and any BD pc Indicators State of Needle F/N Indicated to pc Signature of Examiner ROUTE THIS FORM TO TECH SERVICES WHICH ROUTES IT INTO THE FOLDER. WHEN ILLNESS REPORTED MAKE THIS OUT WITH A CARBON UNDER IT AND ROUTE ORIG TO T/S AND FOLDER AND CARBON TO MO OR QUAL SEC. RUSH ROUTE ANY ROLLER COASTER LATER REPORT OR SICK RPT TO FOLDER TO PREVENT C/S ERRORS. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mes.rd Founder Copyright (c) 1971 [Note: Two earlier issues of the Examiner's Form, HCO P/Ls by L. Ron Hubbard 18 September 1968 and 30 September 1968 Issue II, were revised ALL RIGHTS RESERVED by HCO P/L 9 May 1969 which was later revised by this issue.] 163 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 27 NOVEMBER 1959 [Excerpt] CenOCon KEY TO THE ORGANIZATIONAL CHART OF THE FOUNDING CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY OF WASHINGTON DC HCO BOARD OF REVIEW Purpose: To validate for full results every certificate ever issued in Dianetics and Scientology. To be the final authority on any certificates to be issued. To be the final authority on Clear certification. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:js.rd Copyright (c) 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [Note: The full Policy Letter is given in Volume 7, page 138.1 HUB13ARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 31 JULY 1965 [Excerpt] Remimeo All Qual Hats THE DEPARTMENT OF CERTIFICATIONS AND AWARDS The Department of Certifications and Awards has the prime purpose in all its functions: "TO HELP RON ISSUE AND RECORD VALID ATTESTATIONS OF SKILL, STATE AND MERIT HONESTLY DESERVED, ATTAINED OR EARNED BY BEINGS, ACTIVITIES OR AREAS." The validity of issue and decrying any false issue are the concerns of the Department of Certifications and Awards. The Department is fully within its rights to recommend issue when it is unjustly denied or to refuse issue when it is obviously not in keeping with its prime purpose. The orders, rules, regulations, policies and routes were intended to assist it and expedite the carrying out of its purpose. Therefore no order, rule, regulation, policy or route may deny the personnel of the Department the right to carry out its prime purpose as above. LRH:ml.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright(c) 1965 by L. Ron Hubbard [Excerpted from HCO Policy Letter of 31 July 1965, Purposes of ALL RIGHTS RESERVED the Qualifications Division. A complete copy appears on page 1.1 164 NOT HCO POLICY LETTER ORIGINAL COLOUR FLASH NOT GREEN ON WHITE Extract from: OPERATIONAL BULLETIN NO. 3 7th November 1955 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE The HCO takes over final authority on any certificates to be issued. The certificates are prepared by the various Scientology organizations, but they are finalized by the HCO. No other organization can issue certificates except the HCO. W. H. Young (copy HCO, Washington) Chairman (11/19/57) bt.rd L. RON HUBBARD THE FOUNDING CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY 1812 19th Street N.W., Washington, D.C. FOUNDING CHURCH POLICY LETTER OF 20 MARCH 1957 STAFF CERTIFICATE DISPLAY Each staff member shall display near his place of work his highest practical (not honorary) certificate, his highest ordination and staff member card, suitably framed. LRH:rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright (c) 1957 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE LONDON HCO POLICY LETTER OF 28 APRIL 1957 HCO BOARD OF REVIEW GOAL Our goal is to review and stamp every staff certificate of any level or task and every field certificate Validated for Advanced Processes HCO Board of Review 1957, after their passing a proper examination on 5 levels of Indoc and CCH. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:rs.rd 165 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE LONDON (Issued at Washington) HCO POLICY LETTER OF 19 AUGUST 1957 To: All Staff Bulletin Board RELEASE ALL CERTIFICATES THAT ARE PAID UP WITH ACCOUNTING, VALIDATED OR NOT. PERMIT VALIDATION WHERE NECESSARY AFTER FACT OF RELEASE. LRH:md.rd rs:26.8.57 L. RON HUBBARD HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE LONDON (Issued at Washington) HCO POLICY LETTER OF 2 SEPTEMBER 1957 - Effective this Date - All Staff B. Board FIELD CERTIFICATES The only certificates which may be issued in the Field will be an HAS-Hubbard Apprentice Scientologist. This is world-wide. Auditors whose certificates have been validated with a gold seal may coach auditors in the field and validate their highest certificate. Washington and London central organizations will be the only places where one can obtain an HCA, HPA, BScn, or DScn. LRH:md.rd rs:6.9.57 L. RON HUBBARD NOT HCO POLICY LETTER ORIGINAL COLOUR FLASH NOT GREEN ON WHITE HUB13ARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE LONDON HCO BULLETIN OF 19 NOVEMBER 1957 HCO - FINAL AUTHORITY ON CERTIFICATES HCO takes over final authority on any certificates to be issued. Certificates are prepared by the various Scientology Organizations but they are finalized by HCO. No other organization can issue certificates except HCO. [Unsigned] Taken from Hat Digest No. 3 HCO B 31 August 1957. 166 NOT HCO POLICY LETTER ORIGINAL COLOUR FLASH NOT GREEN ON WHITE HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W. I (Issued at Washington) HCO BULLETIN OF 28 MARCH 1958 All Staff Bulletin Board Field Offices ONLY ORGANIZATION OFFICES CAN CERTIFY CLEARS We are in receipt of many protests from auditors concerning our announcement that any auditor could certify clears. It is felt by field auditors that only HASI and HCO offices should finally test for and certify clears. It has been explained to us that the state of Clear must not become the subject of invalidation and that this might occur in field testing and certifying. Therefore the HCO Board of Review has made a ruling that only Central Organization offices such as HASI-L.A., HASI-London, HASI-New Zealand, HASI-South Africa,* FC-New York and HCO-Washington may test for issuance of a final certification of the state of Clear. Only HCO Washington may issue Clear Bracelets at this time. This cancels a statement that field auditors can certify clears and get bracelets for their pcs, Field auditors may however send their cleared pcs, in for tests and bracelets to the Central Organizations named above. It must be understood that this decision is made only after a flood of objections to field Clear certification by the field itself. The cost of tests at Central Organization is f 3 and the cost of a sterling silver Clear Bracelet S 15 US (UK *) except to HGC preclears who receive them free of charge when Clear is actually reached during an intensive. HCO Board of Review UK bracelet price to be issued later. bt.rs.rd 167 NOT HCO POLICY LETTER ORIGINAL COLOUR FLASH BLUE ON GOLD HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 (Issued at Washington) HCO BULLETIN OF 30 JUNE 1958 (Revision of HCO Bulletin of 28 May 1958) 1 each Staff Member Dir Pr hat HOD Bd Review hat Testing hat Field Offices PROCEDURE FOR CERTIFYING CLEARS This applies WORLD-WIDE All Offices and Auditors Clears are tested by several departments. In only one department does all this data assemble. And only that one unit can pronounce a clear "Clear". Testing department gives test. Testing should not tell pc anything which would lead pc to think he has been passed for clear. Dir of Pr gives an E-Meter test and review of written tests but cannot finally inform pc he is clear. The most he can say is that it seems so, but final declaration of clear is reserved to the HCO Board of Review. When all papers and data are assembled at HCO Board of Review, this unit then reviews the entire picture. HCO Bd of Review can call for a retest at its own discretion after a lapse of time. HCO Bd of Review then submits all tests to LRH for a final review. Only after LRH certifies a person as "Clear" can a clear bracelet be issued. THIS APPLIES WORLD-WIDE. ALL TESTS FROM ALL OFFICIAL SCIENTOLOGY OFFICES. The issuance of the bracelet by HCO Bd of Review is the first time the recipient is informed finally that he is clear. This Bulletin is retroactive to the first person cleared by modern Scientology. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:md.rd 168 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 1 ea staff member HASI POLICY LETTER OF 30 JUNE 1958 Testing hat (Revision of 25/2/58 FC Policy Ltr Dir Pr hat - not originally issued in London) HCO Bd Review hat Invoicing hat Field Offices CLEAR BRACELET PROCEDURE All clear bracelets cost L4. This is the only price. Applies to Field Offices, ACC students, individuals, everybody. The only FREE bracelets issued are to HGC-made clears, and cleared Permanent Staff Members, London. The London Procedure is as follows: a person desiring to be tested for clear reports to Testing FIRST (after paying Reception for test). Testing dept gives test. Testing should not tell person anything which would lead person to think he has been passed for clear. Person then reports to Dir of Pr who gives an E-Meter test and review of written tests but cannot finally inform person he is Clear. The most he can say is that it seems so, but final declaration of clear is reserved to HCO Bd of Review (after final review by LRH). Dir of Pr then sends all tests and E-Meter checkout sheet to HCO Bd of Review. HCO Bd of Review goes over all the papers and tests to make sure they are in order. (HCO Bd of Review can call for a retest at his discretion after a lapse of time.) When HCO Bd of Review has all tests and papers on that person in order, he then submits them to LRH for a final review. After LRH certifies the person as "Clear", HCO Bd of Review then notifies person they are eligible for a clear bracelet. When HCO Bd of Review advises a person that they are eligible for bracelet, he should ask them to let him know immediately the exact way they want their name written on the bracelet, if he does not already have this information to hand. HCO Bd of Review gets the exact date of clearing from the tests. If the person was an HGC preclear, there is no charge to him for the bracelet, and HCO Bd of Review must notify INVOICING that that person is entitled to a clear bracelet, whereupon Invoicing writes up an invoice for that person, marking it "HGC preclear London, no charge". (If person is a London Permanent Staff Member, Invoicing marks "London Perm. Staff Member, no charge".) If person is NOT an HGC preclear, then HCO Board of Review advises them at the time he informs them of their eligibility for a bracelet to send in f 4 to "Invoicing". Payment- note: Payment of bracelet can be arranged, however, before the person leaves the central organization premises. They can pay L4 to Invoicing and the invoice can be retained by HCO Bd of Review in the person's folder. If person pays before they leave, then Invoicing should make out the invoice exactly as the person would like to have their name appear on the bracelet. Bracelets can be partially paid for-they will be engraved and sent C.O.D. for balance where necessary. If it is a local purchase, the total payment must be on hand before delivery is made. Can be paid for a little at a time before delivery is made. FIELD OFFICES: (example: HASI, South Africa) When they check an HGC preclear, they send all tests and papers to HCO Bd of Review in Washington, DC. Above procedure follows. (Field office bears cost of an HGC preclear, not the person himself.) All bracelets issued must be invoiced and must follow this procedure. L. RON HUBBARD Note to field offices: LRH gives final authority on issue of bracelets, so send completed tests to wherever he is-but send f 4 to London for price of clear bracelet. LRH:md.rd 169 NOT HCO POLICY LETTER ORIGINAL COLOUR FLASH GREEN ON GOLD HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W. I HCO BULLETIN OF 17 NOVEMBER 1958 Full Distribution CLEAR BRACELETS No clear bracelets will be issued until person has been tested for engrams as per E-Meter techniques of 5th London ACC which will be made available shortly. LRH:mp.rd L. RON HUBBARD HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W. I HCO POLICY LETTER OF 20 MARCH 1959 CERTIFICATES HANDLING When handling certificates, never put hands, arms or anything on area of certificates printed for signature. Do not use paper clips on certificates. All certificates should be hand carried through the lines to keep their shape, and keep from getting worn by handling. Use a certificate folder set aside for this purpose. VALIDATION SEALS FOR FIELD AUDITORS A Blue Seal is rated after: 1. The person is trained by a Gold Seal holder 2. He passes TRs & CCHs to satisfaction of Gold Seal 3. He is recommended by Gold Seal holder 4. He is ok'd by Dir of Tr and HCO Bd of Review. A record of all validated auditors in a log book should be kept at all times by the HCO Board of Review. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mp.rd 170