49

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

                   HCO BULLETIN OF 1 DECEMBER 1980
      _LIMITED_
      _DISTRIBUTION_
    Advanced Courses
      Specialist
      Checksheet
    ACS Auditors
    ACS C/Ses

                       _NED for OTs Series 49_

                      _C O N F I D E N T I A L_

                   _ACKNOWLEDGING THE "ME" ANSWER_

              (Ref:  NOTs Series 7, VALENCES
                     NOTs Series 47, VALENCE TECHNIQUE
                                     ADDITION)

         This HCOB gives an additional step to the NOTs Valence Technique,
    and a further clarification of each of the steps of this technique.

         _The_new_step_consists_of_"acknowledging_the_"me"_answer"._Doing_
    _so_can_guarantee_a_blow._

         A lot of the time there is nothing there to acknowledge because
    it has already blown. Most of the time this isn't needed, but when
    used it does prevent a hang-up when the BT hasn't gone. So its actual
    value is the fact that it can guarantee a blow.

         (By the way, you can call one back and acknowledge it, but don't
    get into that. This is mentioned simply because it is possible to
    call them back.)

              _THE FULL STEPS OF THE VALENCE TECHNIQUE_

    O.  _Identifying what you are going to handle._

                                - 1 -

    HCOB 1.12.80

         Although this is strictly speaking not part of the Valence
    Technique, one has to start off by finding a BT or cluster that you
    are going to blow with the NOTs Valence Technique. This zero step
    then consists of whatever action one is on, such as Rudiments, a NOTs
    Program Step, Repair List or whatever, that uncovers a reading charge
    that one identifies as a BT or cluster. Having found a reading charge
    one has to identify what that charge is coming from, i.e. a BT or a
    cluster (and less commonly, "a BT that thinks it's a cluster", or "a
    cluster that thinks it's a BT").

         This step varies depending on what Program step or category you
    are working on. E.g. on Program Step #17, "Mass Mistaken For the Mass
    of the Body", you ask the Pre-OT to "Look over the body and tell me if
    there is any mass." or "...any massy body part or area?", or "...any
    area of the body that is solid?". When you get a reading area of
    mass, you then need to identify what this is, i.e. "Is it a BT?", "Is
    it a cluster?".

         On Step #18, "BTs Being Body Parts", you have the Pre-OT look
    over the various parts of the body until you get a reading body part.
    Or, you call off various parts, i.e. "Head?", "Face?", "Neck?",
    "Inside?", "Outside?", etc. until you get a read. In this instance
    you have the position or area of the body where the BT or cluster is,
    but still need to identify it by asking: a BT?, a Cluster? (But note
    that in this instance as in the paragraph above, you have also found
    where the BT or Cluster is in relation to the body).

         But if you are flying ruds, or handling a prepared list, to
    start with all you have is a reading question. You then find _whose_
    charge it is, (per HCOB 20 Deac 79 AUDITING SOMEBODY UNDER CONSTANT
    AND CONTINUOUS PT STRESS and HCOB 22 Dec 79 FLYING RUDS AT OT III AND
    ABOVE) by asking: "Is it yours?", "a BT's?, "a cluster's?" or , "Is
    it also _________'s?". This action identifies what you have found
    and are now going to handle.

         This is really a preliminary step to the Valence Technique in
    which you are (a) finding something to run, and (b) identifying what
    you have found. You are establishing whether it is "a BT", "a
    cluster", maybe "several BTs", or even "more than one cluster", (in
    the case of a plural, the Pre-OT would need to be told to limit his
    attention to one of these, so you can handle one at a time.)

         Having found a charge and identified what it is, you now can move
    into the Valence Technique to blow that BT or cluster (unless it has
    already blown by this point, which is quite often so, many blow by
    inspection, especially if the Pre-OT is running cleanly and rapidly).

    1. _"Where is the BT (or cluster)?"_

         The auditor has the Pre-OT locate where the BT or cluster is by
    position in relation to the body. The auditor notes the area named by
    the Pre-OT and whether it reads. When the Pre-OT names the correct
    place it will read. Do not let the Pre-OT go on looking for
    additional new areas until the reading area is fully handled.

                                - 2 -

    HCOB 1.12.80

         (As noted above under Step 0, you may have already located where
    the BT is, in which case you wouldn't then ask the Pre-OT to find
    where t is.)

         The location of a BT or cluster is not always _in_ the body, they
    can also be _on_ the body, _outside_ the body, even at some _distance_from_
    the body.

         Steps 0 and 1 are not rote. These steps are done to then enable
    the Pre-OT to limit his attention span to the specific BT or cluster
    while asking the auditing question. Otherwise you could jump from BT
    to BT, restimulating other areas than that being worked on.

    2. _"What are you?"_

         (Note that any and all listing done follows the HCOB 1 Aug 68 THE
    LAWS OF LISTING AND NULLING. These have not changed just because they
    are being used in a different process. An auditor who does not know
    these should not attempt this step, and should master this HCOB before
    attemtping this step.)

         The auditor has the Pre-OT ask the BT or cluster the question,
    and relay the answer to the auditor, who writes the answer down and
    notes whether it read. _Only_if_the_first_item_does_not_read,_do_you_
    _list_further_items._ Very often the first answer reads and that is
    the item.

         If the first item did not read, you've now got to ask him for
    another answer, an you have got to make sure that it comes from that
    exact spot or area. You have got to make sure that he isn't shifting
    his attention all over his "left side", or you'd get the whole bank in
    that area alive. You could say: "Now, from that same spot, is there
    another answer? another? another?". _And_this_is_done_only_to_the_
    _first_reading_item._ You might have to verify it: "Is that (answer)
    from the same spot?".

         This is why you establish where the BT or cluster is located in
    Step 1, as you can then ensure that the Pre-OT limits his attention
    to, and directs the auditing question to, that exact spot. E.g. "Put
    your attention on the top of your left ear and ask "What are you?"

         _The_auditor_indicates_the_first_ reading_item._  (Don't forget
    that the PreOT can't see the meter, and the auditor must say what
    read, and must not let the Pre-OT overlist.) You indicate the item by
    saying "Pc wording of the first reading item") is the item". Don't
    get sloppy and say "That's the item", as how does he know what you
    mean by "that"? If "catfish" was the item say, "Catfish is the item",

         Normally, but not always, you will get an F/N on finding and
    indicating the item, but if you do not get an F/N here, you will on
    the next step.

         (Warning: On this step remember that you may have already

                                - 3 -

    HCOB 1.12.80

    received the answer in Step 0 or Step 1. BTs and clusters may not be
    aware of the fact that they are living beings and may not release any
    charge at all on "BT" or "cluster". But when you ask _where_ they are,
    you may have gotten an answer to _what_ they are being, simply by asking
    for body locations. This is not common, but not uncommon either: you
    asked if the BT was on his foot and you got a big read. In this What
    step you might have trouble getting a reading item and might miss the
    fact that you already had the reading item for his What step in
    "foot". The BT was being a foot and you discovered it by accident
    without recognizing it, so if you have any trouble with the What step,
    one of the first things to check is whether or not a "What" already
    read on asking for the "Where" on Step 0 or Step 1. If you suspect
    this, put the named body part that read on the list and check it out
    as part of the list. You won't have to do this often, but you better
    know about it.)

    3.   _Acknowledgement_

         The auditor has the Pre-OT acknowledge the item. This is very
    important (see NOTs Series 7).

         Even if you got an F/N on the previous step, you still
    acknowledge and you will broaden the F/N. And if you didn't get an
    F/N previously, you will on acknowledging the item. And you'll quite
    often get a blow on this step.

    4.   _"Who are you?"_

         Now we have to remember that it is the same spot again and we
    ask, "Who are you?", and we don't feed them the answer. They
    sometimes comm lag (don't get impatient with the comm lag), sometimes
    it's a few seconds comm lag, and then you get the answer. You may
    have to repeat he question. The "Me" answer will normally LFBD, and
    if that LFBD isn't very marked, you make sure you do the next step of
    acknowledging the "Me" answer. In any event you could still
    acknowledge, but if the LFBD was pronounced the probability is that
    he's gone.

         Now there is a special condition you can run into on the "Who are
    you?" question if the BT answers with a significance or identity
    answer. This is covered in NOTs Series 7. But if this continues,
    suspect that you may have gotten a wrong item on the "What are you?"
    question, or that the Pre-OT has used too broad an attention span or
    let his attention wander to other areas and he is getting answers from
    other BTs or Clusters.

    5.   _Acknowledgement_

         The auditor has the PreOT acknowledge the BT's "Me"answer. This
    action can guarantee a blow.

         Now if this acknowledgement produces another read then we know it
    guaranteed a blow. Sometimes you get _another_ LFBD on the
    acknowledgment step, and sometimes you get a broadening of the F/N.

                                - 4 -

    HCOB 1.12.80

         And that completes the steps of the NOTs Valence Technique.

                              _CAUTION_

         Sometimes, quite often in fact, this short-circuits. You ask:
    "What are you?" and the guy says "Me" and blows. And Sometimes you
    are patiently trying to go through all these steps and you get a
    series of blows. A blow or a series of blows can occur at any time
    during NOTs. You don't then continue the steps of this Technique, as
    that BT or cluster has gone! Sometimes a series of blows or an
    automatic blow will go into a Persistent F/N or a Floating Tone Arm
    and in either instance you would end off the session.

         Also you can get repetitive blows if a case is running pretty
    clean, and you can get blows without BDs. There isn't much left on
    the charge and it isn't registering on the meter to amount to
    anything.

         There is also the case of a "partial blow" and the description
    and handling for this is given in NOTs Series 45, HCOB 10 Feb 79
    PARTIALLY BLOWN BTS.

         On "Hello and OK" you sometimes get a blow. The BT or cluster
    doesn't answer up and you run "Hellos and OKs" repetitively to get it
    into comm. Rarely, it will suddenly blow, and it would then be
    senseless to go on trying to run "Hello and OK" or anything else, as
    that one has gone.

         Some auditors have been known to ask a pc if it blew, during the
    Valence Technique steps. Even nag the PreOT, "Did it blow?", "Has it
    gone?", "Still around?". This could be due to the auditor's
    unfamiliarity with his meter, and not recognizing a blow when he sees
    it occur on the meter. Or, possibly some may have confused another
    technique, Date/Locate, with this technique. You of course always
    Date to blow, and Locate to blow, and the auditor could get the idea
    that he should carry over Date/Locate technique into the Valence
    Technique.

         It is very poor practice to ask the PreOT if it blew during NOTs
    Valence Technique. You could cause the BT or cluster to submerge or
    be suppressed, or you could invalidate a blow that did occur.

         This doesn't mean that you can't _ever_ ask if it blew. You could
    ask if it is "still around?" and a read would confirm that it is. But
    this type of question is asking for a _missingness._ It's no longer
    there. There's a large number of pcs that never see the blow, and it
    isn't something to see, because it's a missingness. This type of
    question can be difficult for the PreOT to answer, as there is now
    nothing there for him to perceive as it has gone. If the meter BD'd
    and F/Ned on the "Me" step, it would be idiocy to then ask if it blew,
    of course it did! But if your meter didn't tell you it blew, you
    could be in a quandary and have to solve that problem. But you

                                - 5 -

    HCOB 1.12.80

    wouldn't interrupt the Valence Technique to ask if it blew, and you
    wouldn't get into nagging the PreOT. You just follow on through your
    steps, and particularly if you had the PreOT ack the "Me" answer, then
    you got your blow alright. So this concern about whether the BT blew
    is misplaced.

         These points are stated so that the auditor will understand what
    he is doing, why he is doing it, and what manifestation he can expect
    to occur, because these manifestations will occur. This technique is
    a very positive series of steps, and they go in that sequence. If
    these steps are done as given, you will get the result, and if
    departed from or if there is an error, you can definitely expect to
    get that manifestation too, i.e. too broad an attention span and you
    will get restim.

         It is necessary that the auditor and C/S understand these points
    as this is not a technique that can be done rotely or robotically.

                         _OT III TECHNIQUES_

         Sometimes you will need to use OT III techniques, especially when
    you run into a cluster. And it is effective, just like it always was.
    You sometimes get into a situation where you have an inert mass. You
    run some "Hellos and OKs" and it actually becomes less inert, but it
    is still a cluster. That condition can exist but it usually isn't
    untied with "Hello & OK". It's a cluster and it reads on cluster.
    Then it's your assessment for mutual incident, "Accident?, Illness?,
    Impact?, Injury?, etc.", you do the assessment of what is this thing.
    You get your mutual incident. Sometimes the cluster will explode
    apart or break up on the assessment alone. You found what was holding
    it together. Then you wouldn't try to Date/Locate it. You'd have the
    PreOT pick off individuals and run them on the Valence Technique. But
    if there was no disintegration of the cluster on finding the mutual
    incident, you'd carry right on and Date/Locate, Inc II and Inc Is (or
    NOTs Valence Technique).

         Now there's a variation on mutual incidents. You can get a
    mutual incident that is current, contemporary, like he went PTS or
    something. Had a big ARC break or something. But it isn't as
    strenuous as a cluster-making incident. It's a sort of a lock. It
    isn't a mutual incident like an impact, injury, illness, accident,
    shock, etc. But a guy can run into a recent heavy upset or general
    charge of some kind, heavy stress, and you get the reaction described
    in HCOB 20 Dec 79 NOTs Series 48, under "Routine A". There you had a
    general total restim - it is actually a mutual incident as it happened
    to all of them - it's near PT though and they all copy it, and when
    you hit it you get a sudden BD and a relief. But you are not going to
    blow any BTs to amount to anything as it isn't a cluster-making
    incident. So you have to be able to differentiate between these two
    types of mutual incidents, the recent this life lock, and the heavy
    impact, injury, explosion type of mutual incident that forms a
    cluster. The cluster will resolve with the OT III, mutual incident,
    Date/Locate, Inc II and Inc Is routine. And that's why you start off
    on the NOTs course with a re-study and clear up any MUs on the OT III
    [missing line or page]
                                - 6 -

    HCOB 1.12.80              _SOMATICS_

         The original research on somatics was done in the late '50's in
    Washington, and I found how a somatic comes about. It's based on the
    fact that one being by himself couldn't have a somatic. You have to
    have two beings to have a somatic. A cluster can have a somatic. You
    wouldn't ask a question for a BT with a somatic, that would be a wrong
    question and is based on a false datum, and is an out-tech question.
    You could have two or more BTs smashed together somehow producing a
    somatic, but you would have to take up each of these BTs individually
    to blow them.

         But usually about the only time you will run into a somatic in
    NOTs is when there has been an error. A wrong item, or something of
    that sort. It may be that a somatic in NOTs is always an indicator of
    an error. It seems to be so. And the wise auditor on NOTs should be
    alerted to the probability of an error of some kind if the Pre-OT does
    turn on a somatic. You can easily and quickly check for an error in
    what you have just been running in the session, or use a NOTs Repair
    List to locate and handle the BPC.

                           _UNDERSTANDING_

         It is very essential that NOTs auditors and C/Ses understand the
    NOTs materials, and don't try to insist on a rote set of questions or
    steps, as NOTs doesn't run well as a rote or robotic rundown. That
    are very exact steps and manifestations and sequences and you will get
    these everytime. Anytime there have been flubbed cases on NOTs these
    have traced to MU's on the part of the auditor and/or C/S. The NOTs
    course checksheet was specificially designed to prevent this with
    Supervisor meter checks for MU words frequently throughout the
    checksheet. But there was an instance of a student who "skipped" the
    MU word check by the Supervisor, which is a sure route to catastrophe.
    Any trouble on NOTs has traced back to failure to clear words
    misunderstood in either the OT III materials or in the NOTs materials.
    This gives the solution to any auditor or C/S troubles with NOTs.
    Clear the MU words, and re-study the materials so that you do
    understand and can apply them. It will certainly make your life as an
    auditor or C/S much easier, and will enable you to get the rave
    results that NOTs is known for routinely.

                        _SOCIOLOGICAL IMPACT_

         Have you considered the sociological impact that you are having
    by auditing NOTs? You are turning free beings loose in torrents.
    This is bound to have an effect on society, especially when these
    start picking up bodies and turn up to join the team at their local
    org! You are not just auditing one pc at this level, you are churning
    out cleared beings in volume, and we will start seeing the results
    sooner or later on society in general. Maybe you have thought about
    this too, it's nice to recognize the good effects you are creating!

                                 [7]

    HCOB 1.12.80
                                                   L. RON HUBBARD,
                                                   FOUNDER
    LRH:dm:kjm
    Copyright (c) 1980
    by L. Ron Hubbard
    ALL RIGHTS RESERVED          [8]

50

                    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
               Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

                   HCO BULLETIN OF 30 JANUARY 1980
      _LIMITED_
      _DISTRIBUTION_
    NOTs Auditors &
    C/Ses ONLY
                       _NED for OTs Series 50_

                      _C O N F I D E N T I A L_

                       _NOTs OT DRUG RUNDOWN_

               (Ref: HCOB 29 Jan 80 THE OT DRUG RUNDOWN
               WHICH MUST BE STUDIED PRIOR TO STUDYING
               THIS HCOB.)

         This issue adds to the OT III HCOB referenced above, and gives
    additional data and handlings which are limited to NOTs auditors and
    C/Ses, and which are for use on cases being audited on NOTs. (The OT
    III handlings of drugs can also be used on NOTs cases.)

         As you know from NOTs data, BTs can be being anything. They
    can be being a particular drug, or being a drug picture or incident,
    or even an "acid trip" for example.

         The way you would handle a NOTs case on drugs is similar in
    that you would first of all get the person through the Purification
    Rundown. A case already started on NOTs can be put onto the
    Purification RD without having been completed on NOTs, in fact, you
    may not be able to complete some cases without it. You do not have to
    take the case to a Rest Point. Just ensure that the case is not left
    incomplete (or messed up) on a specific action or category before
    starting the Purification RD. Then do not attempt to combine NOTs
    auditing with the Purification RD until it is completed.

         Do not attempt to run Objective processes on a case during
    NOTs.

         _The_caution_of_not_asking_for_Drugs_or_Drug_incidents_
    _generally_ also applies to NOTs auditing as such a question would
    result in a total restim.

                                - 1 -

    HCOB 30.1.80

         What you can do is to add "Drugs" and "a BT being a drug", "a
    BT affected by drugs", "a BT being a drug trip", "a BT being a drug
    picture", into a prepared assessment or list.

         You can check for a read on drugs on a specific BT or cluster,
    and then handle that BT or cluster to a blow.

         All of the data published on the subject of drugs and their
    effect in preventing case gain applies to BTs and cluster's cases.

         Most commonly drugs have shown up on NOTs cases as _either_
    _cluster-making_incidents_ , or on individual _BTs_being_the_drug_ or
    affected by the drug, or copying other BT or cluster pictures of
    drugs.

         Several cases who were stalled on NOTs or who were making
    minimal gain on NOTs have been resolved by handling drugs as described
    in this issue.

                          _CASE HISTORIES_

         The following case histories (reported by FSO C/Ses), of case
    handling done on NOTs Pre-OTs on drugs are limited to this issue as
    they contain NOTs techniques and data. These are additional case
    histories to those given in HCOB 29 Jan 80, THE OT DRUG RUNDOWN,
    (those cases were also piloted by NOTs auditors and C/Ses, but do not
    contain confidential NOTs data).

    _Case 1_ :

         "Institutional case who had Sodium Pentathol as an anaethetic
    just prior to 'gong nuts' and then being put in an institution".

         "Running NOTs techniques on this drug, BTs stuck in this drug,
    BTs being this drug, BTs affected by this drug, _turned_the_case_ sane._"

    _Case 2_ :

         "LSD some 200 times. Had so far refused any standard Sweat
    Out program. Case gain totally hung fire on his attempts to get the
    perception he had when he took LSD."

         "From a GF 40 Expanded, drugs read heavily and his first gains
    from NOTs were acheived in handling cluster-making incidents from LSD
    trips, BTs/clusters stuck in LSD, being LSD, etc. This was run for
    approximately one intensive with Pre-OT interest. It didn't crack the
    case but some headway was made."

         (The next action for this case is to get him onto and through
    the Purification RD, then the full NOTs OT Drug RD.)

    _Case 3_ :

         "LSD 220 to 250 times, and alcohol and other heavy street

                                - 2 -

    HCOB 30.1.80

    drugs. He was a point where he could hardly walk or articulate".

         "Many cluster-making incidents on drugs, LSD, alcohol, were
    handled through the Rundown. Many were Reviv'd in past locations and
    some stuck there (i.e. physically)".

         "He cognited and BD'd on disturbing a pocket of acid held down
    by a BT. BTs/clusters restimulated by that were handled, then
    BTs/clusters stuck in drug trips and copies of drug trips".

         "He started recovering physically. Articulation handled and
    walking improved".

         "On NOTs Series 34 handling of illness, alcohol was the item.
    His speech went back to normal after this - Pre-OT felt tremendous".

         "Lots of charge blown on BTs/clusters stuck in hospital drug
    (ACTH).
    Result of less numb, more sensation".

         "Later a NOTs Series 43 handling was done on alcohol, plus
    Date/Locate of a cumulative cluster on drugs. His responsibility
    increased and he was off on a persistent win for almost 2 weeks
    experiencing automatic/continuous blow phenomena in life".

         "Lots of 'stuckness' on the case was tied up in drugs and
    alcohol. Case is currently doing very well on the Purification RD".

         (Although the Purification RD would normally precede such drug
    handling in NOTs, this case was unable to walk or to talk due to
    paralysis and was considered incurable by the medicos.)

                           ----------------

           "There are also a number of Pre-OTs who have had NOTs Series
    12 handlings on Drug RDs and some on drugs."

                           ----------------

                        _NOTs OT DRUG RD PGM_

         THe NOTs or Drug RD Program is the same program as the OT Drug
    RD (HCOB 29 Jan 80 THE OT DRUG RUNDOWN). It begins with the
    Purification RD, it has the same Steps #1 - 5. But the method of
    handling is by NOTs Valence Technique, rather than Inc II, Inc I.
    Assessment for mutal incident is the same, but individuals from a
    broken up cluster would be handled with NOTs Valence Technique.

         The categories of: "a BT or cluster being _(reading drug)_ ",
    "a BT or cluster affected by _(reading drug)_ ", "a BT being a drug
    trip", "a BT being a drug picture", "a BT or cluster being
    _(mis-emotion)_ ", "a BT or cluster being _(negative item)_ ", should
    also be checked for on each reading drug taken up, and these
    categories may be assessed as part of a prepared list, and should be

                                - 3 -

    HCOB 30.1.80

    so assessed at the end of Step 5.

         Step 6 is different and would consist of a NOTs Series 24
    Repair List assessed and handled, to clean up any loose ends and
    polish off the case, before returning to the NOTs Advance Program.

                    _ADMINISTRATION AND DELIVERY_

         The OT Drug Rd may not be audited on Pre-OTs who have had any
    NOTs auditing, these may only be run on the NOTs OT Drug RD.

         Although the NOTs OT Drug RD is done by a NOTs auditor and
    NOTs C/S, these must be specially trained on the NOTs OT Drug RD and
    only interested, graduated NOTs auditors and C/Ses may be so trained.
    These issues are not added to the ACS Courses, nor given to green
    NOTs auditors or C/Ses.)

         The NOTs OT drug Rundown is not mixed in with the NOTs Advance
    Program, nor is it to be bit and pieced with NOTs, nor given as a blur
    along with NOTs. It is its own special RD and must be delivered as its
    own RD, and as its own package. This does not mean that you cannot
    use the item "drugs" in an assessment for a mutual incident during
    NOTs, nor that you couldn't handle a BT hung up in a drug during NOTs.
    But if drugs or drug items are coming up during NOTs, then the case is
    on the wrong program and should be shifted over to the Purification
    RD, followed by the NOTs OT Drug RD. Then after these are done, you
    would resume the NOTs Advance Program. (As well as not mixing the
    hours on the NOTs OT Drug RD with NOTs hours, there is an important
    Technical reason for only handling one subject at a time and
    completing each action and program before starting another. (ref: C/S
    Series 38, C/S Series 47, & NOTs Series 30.)

         One would not interrupt a Pre-OT who is running well on NOTs
    with good TA action and who is getting rapid blows, but would flatten
    the action before making a change to the Purification RD and the NOTs
    OT Drug RD. These Rundowns can be done at any point during the NOTs
    Advance Program, but ideally they would be entered after the "Past
    Auditing Repair" steps, or after step 14, after step 15, or at any
    point thereafter. If drugs are heavily charged and getting in the
    way, then you would have no choice but to shift programs to handle.

         Ideally the NOTs OT Drug RD should be delivered by a
    specialist team of NOTs auditors and C/S, operating as a unit, who
    then feed completed cases back to regular and interning NOTs auditors.

         The NOTs OT Drug Rundown should help you with cases who hung
    fire or were resistive previously as well as speeding gains and
    results on all cases.

         The pilot results are excellent, and show what sort of gains
    can be attained.

                                                   L. RON HUBBARD
                                - 4 -

    HCOB 30.1.80
                                                   FOUNDER

                                                   As assisted by

                                                   Senior C/S Int
    LRH:dm:kjm
    Copyright (c) 1980
    by L. Ron Hubbard
    ALL RIGHTS RESERVED          [5]

51

                    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
               Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

                   HCO BULLETIN OF 31 JANUARY 1980
      _LIMITED_
      _DISTRIBUTION_
    Advanced Courses
      Specialist
      Checksheet
    ACS Auditors
    ACS C/Ses

                       _NED for OTs Series 51_

                      _C O N F I D E N T I A L_

                      _AUDIT BTs CONCEPTUALLY_

    _(References:_

    HCOB 26 Sep 78 I             WORD CLEARING AND INFORMATION FOR
                                 PRE-PTS ON NED FOR OTs
    HCOB 12 Jan 80               ACKNOWLEDGING THE "ME" ANSWER
    HCOB 27 Oct 79               VALENCE TECHNIQUE ADDITION
    HCOB 17 Sep 78 I             VALENCES.)

                                      ---------------

    (This HCOB adds to HCOB 26 Sep 78, Issue I, WORD CLEARING AND
    INFORMATION FOR PRE-OTs ON NED FOR OTS, and is to be used in the
    indoctrination of Pre-OTs on NED for OTs.)

                                      ---------------

         When a Pre-OT looks at a BT and gets too laggardly,the BT often
    turns on a picture. The NOTs Pre-OT _could_ think this picture was the
    _What._ It _never_ is. The _Whate_ BT is simpIy making a picture. Answers
    come through as concepts, not pictures.

         The rule is: THE PRE-OT IGNORES THE PICTURE AND DOES
                      THE ACTION IN CONCEPTS.

        In NOTs one is not dealing with pictures, one is dealing with
    the basic of pictures. Pctures are a red herring - wrong target.

                                                   L. RON HUBBARD
                                                   FOUNDER
    LRH:dm:kjm
    Copyright (c) 1980
    by L. Ron Hubbard
    ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

52

                    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
               Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

                     HCO BULLETIN OF 24 MAY 1980
      _LIMITED_
      _DISTRIBUTION_
    ACS Auditors
    ACS C/Ses

                       _NED for OTs Series 52_

                      _C O N F I D E N T I A L_

                          URGENT - IMPORTANT

                      _NOTs WHAT/WHO L & N STEP_

    (References:
    HCOB 27 Oct 79, NOTs Series 47, VALENCE TECHNIQUE ADDITION
    HCOB 12 Jan 80, NOTs Series 49, ACKNOWLEDGING THE ME ANSWER.)

               (This HCOB contains important revisions
               and additional instructions regarding the
               NOTS What/Who L & N Step, and modifies
               NOTs Series 47 and 49. It does not other-
               wise cancel or change the rest of the NOTs
               Valence Technique, nor does it change the
               rest of the NOTs procedures or Rundown.
               This issue must be thoroughly word cleared
               and star-rated along with the referenced
               issues by NOT auditors and C/Ses to
               qualify them to use the NOTs What/Who
               L & N Step.)

               _THE RIGHT ITEM, ON THE WHAT L & N STEP_

         In NOTs Series 47 and 49 it is stated that you take "the first
    reading item" (regardless of its read). In experience I have found
    this not always to be true. _One_can_get_some_small_falls_on_several_
    _items_before_the_real_item_is_hit._  Sometimes it requires an ack to
    get an F/N, but _the_real_item_always_F/Ns._

         (E-meter Note: If one were to use other than an operational Mark

                                - 1 -

    HCOB 24.5.80

    VI, one could be mislead by the meter. I have noticed that what is a
    small fall (sF) on an operational Mark VI, is a fall (F) on another
    meter. This is not good, as the auditor seeing a fall F), could
    think he has the item, when it is really a small fall. The
    exaggerated read makes one think wrong items have read when these only
    gave a small fall. Also, the Mark V tends to just F/N, and gives on
    the problem of trying to read through an F/N. The Mark V is not
    sensitive enough. Thus it is essential that an operational Mark VI is
    used. The sizes of reads referred to here are at the correct
    Sensitivity setting of one third dial drop on can squeeze per EM-5R.
    The Sensitivity must not be higher than this during the What/Who L & N
    Steps.)

         The statements in NOTs Series 47 and 49 under Step 3
    (Acknowledgement) are correct and the only change here is in the
    statement that you take "the first reading item", plus a clarification
    of size of read.

         The right What? L & N Step reads are a lot of small falls
    preceding the right item. THE REAL ITEM ALWAYS F/Ns (even if it
    sometimes requires an ack to get it to F/N).

                           _THE "WHO" STEP_

         (Early in the NOTs Rundown, and sometimes later in the Rundown,
    the being blows easily. Often before all the Valence Technique steps
    have been done, frequently blowing on inspection. There is the
    phenomenon (described in earlier NOTs issues) of the cyclic aspect of
    handling more difficult-to-blow BTs and clusters, followed by a series
    of easy/rapid blows. Later in the Rundown, after the more available
    and easier-to-blow BTs and clusters have gone, those remaining tend to
    be in worse shape as beings. You are then more frequently going to
    encounter the following phenomenon.)

         The being seldom gets much of a read and seldom a blow on the
    first right answer to the Who? question. It gives an answer, the
    right answer ("Me"), in many cases and there's no real read. What one
    does then is ack encouragingly and asks it to repeat the answer
    ("Me"). Thus encouraged, a BD F/N and blow on the repeated answer
    occurs.

                       _PIN-POINTING ATTENTION_

         It is essential that the NOTs PreOT limits his/her attention to
    the BT/cluster being addressed. You can get a mish-mash if their
    attention goes onto something else. I have developed TR 8-Q (HCOB 22
    Apr 80) which is an exercise in pin-pointing attention as well as
    asking a question. Requiring a NOTs PreOT to do TR 8-Q will remedy
    this.

                      _REPAIR LISTS FOR L & N_

         There are two repair lists for L & N errors that are shorter than

                                - 2 -

    HCOB 24.5.80

    the L4BRA, and both of these can be used in NOTs. They are: HCOB 23
    Sep 68 "Violation of the Laws of Listing and Nulling", and HCOB 29 Sep
    68 "List Correction" (Tech Vol XI, pages 44, 45), and either of these
    may be used, resorting to the longer L4BRA when necessary. The usual
    thing to do though would be to recognize what was wrong from the reads
    noted in W/Ss (or lack of F/N on the What? item), and handle
    accordingly and as given in earlier NOTs issues.

                              _FES-ING_

         FESers and C/Ses must know the materials given in NOTs Series 47,
    49 and this issue and must inspect worksheets to see whether correct
    (or wrong) items have been found, and whether the BT or cluster was
    blown. C/Ses must do this on every session, and FESers when they are
    looking for errors on a case. Any previous instances of failure to
    get the right item, or failure to handle a being to a blow can then be
    taken up in subsequent sessions and properly handled as described in
    this issue. If the BT/cluster is still around it will read when the
    PreOT's attention is directed to that position (area) and oriented to
    the item given in that session. (Remember that it now may be
    Suppressed or Invalidated, and that the being probably has a Wrong
    Item and an Incomplete List.) If the error can be found and corrected
    immediately, do so (such as simply completing the list to correct
    item, and completing the steps on that being to blow), or, do one of
    the L & N Repair assessments to find what is wrong and then correct it
    and handle the being to blow.

                   _AUDITOR AND C/S QUALIFICATIONS_

         The requirements for an auditor or C/S to use this NOTs L & N
    technique as given in NOTs Series 47 and 49 are very important and it
    is a High Crime to violate these. ONLY auditors and C/Ses who can L &
    N successfully may be permitted to use this technique, and then only
    after they have completed the stated requirements in NOTs 47, 49, the
    referenced materials and this issue. Until then, they may only use the
    other NOTs techniques, but not the L & N Step.

                 _PROGRAMMING THE WHAT/WHO L & N STEP_

         Note that in NOTs SerieS 47, page 3, under "Warning" it is
    stated: "...it will be necessary to use this technique of listing for
    the item, at some point on any case being audited on NED for OTs,...".
    PreOTs being started on NOTs should not be put onto this technique at
    the beginning of the NOTs Advance Program, no until the PreOT is well
    advanced through the Program. The other NOTs techniques are fully
    adequate and very successful and most of the NOTs 26R Program can be
    done before resorting to the NOTs L & N technique.

         Only shift to the L & N procedure when the PreOT is well advanced
    through the Program and encounters the phenomenon described in NOTs
    47, page 1. Early in the NOTs Program the case is fat with charge

                                - 3 -

    HCOB 24.5.80

    that will slough off easily and with the use of NOTs techniques other
    than the listing technique given in NOTs Series 47. On a case that
    has been prematurely started on the L & N Step, prefer to use the
    earlier NOTs techniques and do not overwork the L & N Step until the
    case is ready for it, (this doesn't mean that one would stop the L & N
    technique altogether on such a case).

         When the case is ready for the NOTs What/Who L & N Step, and
    provided the auditor and C/S are qualified to run it, then the case is
    indoctrinated on the procedure and begun (per NOTs 47, 49 and this
    issue). If all the NOTs auditors and C/Ses are not fully qualified,
    then the PreOT could be reassigned when ready for the L & N Step.

         In general most cases will follow the steps as laid out on NOTs
    26R and 27, as this is the research/developmental sequence of NOTs and
    most cases will follow the same sequence and pattern and phenomena.

         NOTs trainees should also follow this same sequence and only
    train on the later techniques after they have had experience and wins
    on auditing the earlier NOTs Program steps with the earlier
    techniques. Those are very easy to do, very rewarding and will enable
    the new NOTs auditor to gain familiarity and confidence.

                                                   L. RON HUBBARD
                                                   FOUNDER

                                                   as assisted by
                                                   Senior C/S Int
    LRH:dm:kjm
    Copyright (c) 1978
    by L. Ron Hubbard
    ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

54

                    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
               Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

                  HCO BULLETIN OF 14 FEBRUARY 1981
      _LIMITED_
      _DISTRIBUTION_
    Advanced Courses
      Specialist
      Checksheet
    ACS Auditors
    ACS C/Ses

                       _NED for OTs Series 54_

                      _C O N F I D E N T I A L_

               _CLARIFICATION ON ACKNOWLEDGING IN THE_

                         _VALENCE TECHNIQUE_

                   (Ref: NOTs Series 7, VALENCES)

         It is very important that you have the Pre-OT acknowledge the
    answer the BT or cluster gives to the "What are you?" question (see
    NOTs Series 7). Even if you got an F/N on the answer, you still
    acknowledge and you will broaden the F/N.

         We ask "Who are you?" to he same spot and we don't feed them
    the answer. They sometimes comm lag, (don't get impatient with the
    comm lag), sometimes it's a few seconds comm lag, and then you get the
    answer. You may have to repeat the question (see NOTs Series 7). The
    "Me" answer will normally LFBD, and if that LFBD isn't very marked,
    you make _sure_ you do the next step of acknowledging the "Me" answer.
    In any event you could still acknowledge, but if the LFBD was
    pronounced the probability is that he's gone. The auditor having the
    Pre-OT acknowledge the "Me" answer can guarantee a blow. Now is this
    acknowledgement produces another read then we know it guaranteed a
    blow. Sometimes you get _another_ LFBD on the acknowledgement step, and
    sometimes you get a broadening of the F/N.

                              _CAUTIONS_

         Sometimes, quite often in fact, this short-circuits. You ask:
    "What are you?" and the guy says "Me" and blows. And sometimes you
    are patiently trying to go through all these steps and you get a
    series of blows. A blow or a series of blows can occur at any ime
    during NOTs. You don't then continue the steps of this Technique, as
    that BT or cluster has gone! Sometimes a series of

    HCOB 14.2.81
    Confidential                - 2 -

    blows or an automatic blow will go into a Persistant F/N or a Floating
    Tone Arm and in either instance you would end off the session.

         Also you can get repetitive blows if a case is running pretty
    clean, and you can get blows without BDs. There isn't much left on the
    charge and it isn't registering on the meter to amount to anything.

         On "Hello and OK" you sometimes get a blow. The BT or cluster
    doesn't answer up and run "Hellos and OKs" repetitively to get it into
    comm. Rarely, it will suddenly blow, and it would then be senseless
    to go on trying to run "Hello and OK", or anything else, as that one
    has gone.

         Some auditors have been known to ask a pc if it blew, during
    the Valence Technique steps. Even nag the Pre-OT, "Did it blow?",
    "Has it gone?", "Still around?". This could be due to the auditor's
    unfamiliarity with his meter, and not recognizing a blow when he sees
    it occur on the meter. Or, possibly some may have confused another
    technique, Date/Locate, with this technique. You of course always
    Date to blow, and Locate to blow, and the auditor could get the idea
    that he should carry over Date/Locate technique into Valence
    Technique.

         It is very poor practice to ask the Pre-OT if it blew during
    NOTs Valence Technique. You could cause the BT or cluster to submerge
    or be suppressed, or you could invalidate a blow that did occur.

         This doesn't mean that you can't _ever_ ask if it blew. You
    could ask if it is "still around?" and a read would confirm that it
    is. But this type of question is asking for a _missingness_ . It is no
    longer there. There's a large percentage of pcs that never see the
    blow, and it isn't something to see, because it's a missingness. This
    type of question can be difficult for the Pre-OT to answer as there
    is now nothing there for him to perceive as it has gone. If the meter
    BD'd and F/Ned on the "Me" step, it would be idiocy to then ask if it
    blew, of course it did! But if your meter didn't tell you it blew,
    you could be in a quandary and have to solve that problem. But you
    wouldn't interrupt the Valence Technique to ask if it blew, and you
    wouldn't get into nagging the Pre-OT. You just follow on through with
    your steps, and particularly if you had the Pre-OT ack the "Me"
    answer, then you got your blow alright. So this concern about whether
    the BT blew is misplaced.

         These points are stated so that the auditor will understand
    what he is doing, why he is doing it, and what manifestations he can
    expect to occur, because these manifestations will occur. This
    technique is a very positive series of steps, and they go in that
    sequence. If these steps are done as given, you will get the result,
    and if departed from or if there is an error, you can definitely

    HCOB 14.2.81
    Confidential                - 3 -

    expect to get that manifestation too, i.e. too broad an attention span
    and you will get restim.

         It is necessary that the auditor and C/S understand these
    points as this is not a technique that can be done rotely or
    robotically.

                                                   L. RON HUBBARD
                                                   FOUNDER

                                                   Assisted by
                                                   Snr C/S Int Assistant

                                                   Accepted by the
                                                   BOARD OF DIRECTORS
                                                   of the
                                                   CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY
                                                   OF CALIFORNIA

    BDCS:LRH:MM:kjm
    Copyright (c) 1981
    by L. Ron Hubbard
    ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

Correction

                    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
               Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

                     HCO BULLETIN OF 4 JULY 1979
      _LIMITED_
      _DISTRIBUTION_
    NED for OTs
     Auditors
    AO Review Auditors,
       OT III
    ACS Auditors
    Class XII

                      _C O N F I D E N T I A L_

                  _HANDLING CORRECTION LISTS ON OTs_

         When you get a read on a correction list on an individual who is
    on OT III or above, you should find out from what area it is reading;
    i.e. find the position in relation to the body, of the BT or cluster
    on whom that correction list question read.

         Otherwise, the reading correction list line gets assigned to all
    areas, when it only applied to one. This creates BPC as it gives the
    rest a wrong item or wrong indication, and it makes the reading
    queston appear to be a generality, when in fact it only applied to one
    BT or cluster.

         By finding the BT or cluster that the read applied to, the
    auditor then clears the read on that BT or cluster. And then the
    auditor takes any additional steps to get it to blow and blows it.

         The above does not apply to cases below OT III and must never be
    mentioned to such a case.

         There is a tendency of an auditor trained on general correction
    lists to simply clear the read without finding where it is coming
    from, and as this omission can jam up a case who is on OT III or on
    NOTs; such auditors when doing NOTs or actions on individuals OT III
    or above must learn to handle correction lists in this way. It can
    mean the difference between failure and success.

                                                   L. RON HUBBARD
                                                   FOUNDER

    LRH:DM:kjm
    Copyright (c) 1979
    by L. Ron Hubbard
    ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

55

                    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
               Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

                   HCO BULLETIN OF 15 JANUARY 1982
      _LIMITED_
      _DISTRIBUTION_
    Advanced Courses
      Specialist
      Checksheet
    ACS Auditors
    ACS C/Ses

                       _NED for OTs Series 55_

                      _C O N F I D E N T I A L_

                         _VARYING THE AREAS_

         Session by session and item by item, when spotting something
    to list, it is best to work a different area than the last item.

         This is true when there still seem to be more in the last area
    worked.

         Example: one session, top of head; next session, even though
    head is slightly massy although one has blown, work, let's say, an
    area in the back where one is spotted. Then, that listed, handled and
    blown, one can go back to the head.

         The operating rule that seems best is not to work the same
    area twice in succession.

         One also must be sure to work behind as well as in front and
    from different angles from in front and behind. By continuing to work
    from the front only, on and on, builds up an imbalance that can
    increase duress.

         One also must remember to not always work close in: from time
    to time check out areas that are as much as many feet from the body.

         When one has worked one, two or three areas, one is likely to
    get a persistent F/N, very wide, and that is the time to lay off for
    now, end session and begin again later - in a few hours or next day.
    If you keep plugging on after a good win, you are actually overrunning
    a persistent F/N and it clears up by simply indicating that.

    HCOB 15.1.82
    Confidential                - 2 -

    Forcing forward past a good win can give you a temporary pack up; so
    you actually make less progress than you would have if you
    short-sessioned as you are supposed to.

                                                   L. RON HUBBARD
                                                   FOUNDER

    LRH:rdk
    Copyright (c) 1980
    by L. Ron Hubbard
    ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

Qual 3

                    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
               Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

                   HCO BULLETIN OF 11 JANUARY 1980
      _LIMITED_
      _DISTRIBUTION_
    OT III & above only
    NED for OTs Auditors
    AO Review Auditors
    ACS Checksheet
    Class XII
    OT III Cramming
     Officers
    OT III C/Ses

               _Qual Corrective Actions on OTs Series 3_

                      _C O N F I D E N T I A L_

                  _QUAL CORRECTIVE ACTIONS ON OTs_

         (Ref:  C/S Series 107  AUDITOR ASSIGNMENT POLICIES,
                                CRAMMING ASSIGNMENT POLICIES
                HCOB 22 Dec 79  FLYING RUDS AT OT III AND
                                ABOVE)

         The reason why it is necessary to have OT versions of the
    various Qual corrective actions is that an OT's case can be messed up
    if mis-audited or mis-crammed, and the purpose of Qual corrective
    actions is to improve or correct the staff member.

         The major cause of trouble in seeking to correct OTs has been
    violations of the auditor assignment policy, whereby a person of lower
    case level than the OT was trying to audit or cram the OT. Not only
    does this put the OT on a withhold of confidential data, but a person
    of lower case level has no reality on the materials of the case level
    of the OT and can easily stir up aspects of the case that should have
    been left alone, or, if taken up handled fully. Additionally if the
    OT did get messed up, then he could only be repaired by using Repair
    actions appropriate to his case level. A non-OT III Cramming Officer
    or auditor could not possibly repair BPC on an OT III.

         Where Cramming Officers have limited their actions to simply
    word clearing the materials that the person had gone past
    misunderstoods on, it has worked out OK. But if the action being done
    led into the person's case then there is a liability of messed up case
    and ineffective staff member.

    HCOB 11.1.80
    Confidential                - 2 -

         Some of the Qual corrective actions such as False Data
    Stripping and some of the questions in the Product Debug Checklist are
    not directed toward the person's post alone but are directed towards
    the person's case by asking about intentions or reactions or
    considerations or directing the person to recall past events. The
    statement: "I'm not auditing you.", doesn't prevent a case action from
    occurring if one then proceeds to ask auditing questions.

         The worst repercussions of all have stemmed from offline case
    actions done as some sort of squirrelly "2WC" which wasn't a valid
    part of the cramming action anyway.

         When subjective questions are asked one invariably is into a
    case action. Definition of "Subjective": "Consultation with the
    preclear's own universe, with his mock ups, and with his own thoughts
    and considerations." (Book THE CREATION OF HUMAN ABILITY, p. 167.)
    "Recall, think, remember or return on the time track processes are
    subjective." (HCOB 2 Nov 57RA.)

         Subjective actions, especially when metered, lead into the
    person's case. If mis-done, particularly if mis-metered, these can
    ball the case up.

         OTs when correctly handled with the corrrect tech appropriate
    to their case level, handle very quickly and easily. So it is
    important to know what to do and what not to do.

         The solution to this is in having specialized lists for OTs,
    and forbidding the use of non-OT actions on OTs, and forbidding
    non-OTs from seeking to audit or cram OTs.

                _REPAIR OF OTs MESSED UP IN CRAMMING_

         The most frequent cause of BPC encountered is:

         (a)   Misownership,

         (b)   Mismetering (false reads, missed reads and missed
               F/Ns),

         (c)   Invalidation of state of case.

         There are two types of action which are most likely to lead
    into an OT's case and cause BPC:

         (i)   Asking subjective questions,

         (ii)  Asking "earlier similar?" (which sends the Pre-OT
               down the track, or down different tracks.)

    HCOB 11.1.80
    Confidential                - 3 -

         There are ways to detect and isolate what happened in a
    mis-done cramming:

         -The person crammed has _any_ BIs about the cramming action;

         -The person continues to goof in the same area or subject;

         -The person Red Tags on the cramming or within three days
          after the cramming action;

         -The person gets sick, misemotional on the subject of the
          cram, or turns on somatics, within three days after the
          cramming action;

         -The person is introverted on the subject of the cram;

         -The person comes to next session after the cram with TA
          or needle behavior worsened from what it was prior to the
          cram, (such a TA used to be in normal range and now is
          high or low, or Sens setting for 1/3rd dial drop on can
          squeeze is now higher due to tighter needle, an unusual
          needle patern has now appeared, etc.).

         A sharp C/S can usually spot a mis-done cram from the
    worksheets of the cramming action and must insist that these are
    legible and accurate (ref: HCOB C/S Series 98 AUDITING FOLDERS,
    OMISSIONS IN COMPLETENESS).

         When encountering any of the above, the C/S should make up a
    prepared assessment to cover points of possible error in the cramming
    action. Here is a sample assessment which can be used or added to:

    1.   R Factor:       "I'm going t assess a list of possible
         errors which may have occurred in the  _______________
         (cramming action), to locate any BRC."

    2.   Assess:

         "Was there any misownership of charge?"

         "Were significances or reads misowned?"

         "Was there any mismetering?"

         "Was a false read taken up?"

         "Was there any cleaned clean?"

         "Was a read missed?"

         "Was an F/N missed?"

    HCOB 11.1.80
    Confidential                - 4 -

         "Was there any invalidation of state of case?"

         "Were subjective questions asked?"

         "Were earlier similars asked for when these
          did not exist?"

         "Were there any out-ruds?"

         "Was there no help?"

         (The above is a sample assessment which contains the most
    common items you are likely to find on mis-done cramming actions,
    especially on OTs, and the assessment above is designed for use on
    cases who are OT III or above only as it contains "misownership", but
    a similar prepared assessment could be made up for a lower level
    case.)

    3.   Handle reads on the above assessment in accordance with HCOB 4
    July 79 HANDLING CORRECTION LISTS ON OTs and HCOB 22 Dec 79 FLYING
    RUDS AT OT III AND ABOVE. This action alone may completely handle all
    the BPC, sometimes very rapidly and spectacularly.

    4.   If not fully handled with the above, assess and handle the
    appropriate correction list for the action that was messed up (i.e.
    WCCL - Word Clearing Correction List, for messed up word clearing, or
    L4BRA, etc.), handling the reads in accordance with HCOB 4 Jul 79
    HANDLING CORRECTION LISTS ON OTs and HCOB 22 Dec 79 FLYING RUDS AT OT
    III Repair List (or if the person has been audited on NOTs, a NOTs
    Repair List).

                     _ACTIONS THAT CAN BE DONE_

         There are actions that are OK to do in Cramming and will not
    get into the person's case. _These_relate_to_his_post_or_study_and_
    _are_objective._

         Definition of "Objective": "Of or having to do with a material
    object as distinguished from a mental concept, idea or belief"
    (Dictionary). "Means here and now objects in PT as opposed to
    `subjective'." (HCOB 2 Nov 57A.)

         Questions or actions by the Cramming Officer which are
    objective and pertain to the person's post, the materials which cover
    his post, the materials he is studying, clearing words misunderstood,
    hatting actions and post or product debugs (provided subjective
    questions are not asked on OTs) are all OK.

         The most usual and successful cramming action is simply to
    take the materials or text that covers the subject of the cramming
    order and word clear and cram those materials. This is always safe
    and OK to do. (The only other caution is not to give verbal data, nor
    to evaluate or invalidate or throw the person's ruds out while doing
    the cram!)

    HCOB 11.1.80
    Confidential                - 5 -

         Word Clearing Methods 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 are OK to do
    on OTs (but not Method One, which asks for "earlier similar?").

         Finding and clearing Crashing Misunderstood Wrods is OK.

         Demonstrating meanings or words and terms and principles
    either with a demo kit or on Clay Table are OK.

         Starrate checkouts on materials are OK.

         Product Debug Tech is OK to do on OTs (provided the subjective
    questions on the assessments are omitted).

         All of the actions given in this section can and should be
    used in Cramming, and these have no liability.

         OTs when handled correctly in Cramming (or in auditing) are
    very fast and easy to handle, and correct very readily.

                                                   L. RON HUBBARD
                                                   FOUNDER

                                                   As assisted by

                                                   Snr C/S Int

    LRH:DM:kjm
    Copyright  1980
    by L. Ron Hubbard
    ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

Attest 3

                    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
               Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

                   HCO BULLETIN OF 10 NOVEMBER 1981
      _LIMITED_
      _DISTRIBUTION_
    OT III & above
      ONLY

    AO C/Ses
    AO Solo C/Ses
    NOTs C/Ses
    AO Review
     Auditors

                      _C O N F I D E N T I A L_

                      _OT III AND OT III ATTEST_

         This issue changes the current handling of OT III and OT III
    attests and the next step after OT III. We want to end off"endless
    IIIs". Starting now, AO C/Ses are to handle PreOTs on OT III as
    follows.

         Let the person audit on OT III as long as he wishes. But at
    the first slackening or abandonment or EP or if he is just going on
    and on into"endless III", look for a nice win and tell him that's it
    and shunt him over to Audited NOTs.

         An AO Review may be necessary before sending the person to
    attest. On an"endless III"or some of these people who have been
    incomplete on OT III or who have been on and off OT III for a long
    time, a Review would be necessary. The Review could be as short as an
    LDN OT III and Rehab their best win on OT III or as long as a C/S 53
    to F/Ning list followed by an LDN OT III and then Rehab their best win
    on OT III. On some you might only need to find a nice win they had on
    OT III and indicate that that was it, or get it rehabbed in session
    (this would mainly apply to persons currently on OT III).

         Some of this termination of III would depend on auditor
    availability for Audited NOTs , but if this is a situation the
    solution is to train up more NOTs auditors.

         The whole intention here is to take PreOTs who
    have"completed"OT III per the above qualificcation and shunt them over
    to Audited NOTs.

         Let's start making OTs in VOLUME.

                                - 1 -

    HCOB 10.11.81

                                                   L. RON HUBBARD
                                                   FOUNDER

    LRH:dm:kjm
    Copyright (c) 1981
    by L. Ron Hubbard
    ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

45

                    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
               Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

                   HCO BULLETIN OF 10 FEBRUARY 1979
      _LIMITED_
      _DISTRIBUTION_
    Advanced Courses
      Specialist
      Checksheet
    ACS Auditors
    ACS C/Ses

                       _NED for OTs Series 45_

                      _C O N F I D E N T I A L_

                        _PARTIALLY BLOW BTs_

                    (Ref: NED for OTs Series 16)

         In HCOB 17 Sep 78, Issue II, NED for OTs Series 16, the
    phenomenon of partially blown BTs causing "Exterior visio" is
    described and the handling is given.

         In addition to sometimes causing an apparency of exterior
    perception, partially blown BTs can cause a physical reaction of
    discomfort. Not having fully blown they react back against the body
    with energy or mass.

         The reason why they only partially blow is because they are
    still mixed up in a mass with untouched, unaudited BTs that stick
    them. By having the Pre-OT reach out in front of the partially blown
    BTs with a question "Who are you?", the uncleared BT or BTs get
    handled. This may have to be repeated as the group of BTs may blow
    further out and hang up again. Simply keep putting the question "Who
    are you?" out in front of the BTs each time they hang up until they
    blow apart and clear fully and completely.

         It is interesting that the mass sometimes flies apart like
    sparks way out there. It is at that moment the Pre-OT experiences a
    feeling of relaxation.

                                                   L. RON HUBBARD
                                                   FOUNDER

    LRH:dm:kjm
    Copyright (c) 1978
    by L. Ron Hubbard
    ALL RIGHTS RESERVED         - 1 -

                    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
               Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

                   HCO BULLETIN OF 22 FEBRUARY 1979
      _LIMITED_
      _DISTRIBUTION_
    Advanced Courses
      Specialist
      Checksheet
    ACS Auditors
    ACS C/Ses

46

                       _NED for OTs Series 46_

                      _C O N F I D E N T I A L_

                    _BTs WITH MISUNDERSTOOD WORDS_

         I have discovered that BTs can have misunderstood words too!

         The body's ear might hear one thing and the BT might hear
    something else entirely, direct. This results in Mis-U sounds and
    oral words. The BTs don't know what the person is saying, nor do they
    know what is being said to the person, due to these Mis-Us. And the
    person gets caught in the middle of this flow channel, experiencing
    the reaction to the BT's Mis-U. The usual reaction of the BTs is just
    to withdraw.

         BTs can get Mis-Us from reading matter, foreign languages, and I
    have found BTs that don't speak English. Where it really goes wild is
    in auditing, where the BT has a Mis-U on the auditing command or
    question. They would then answer the auditing question wrong to
    themselves, causing a case hang up right there.

         There is also a basic consideration that the Dead would not
    understand anything anyway.

         This phenomenon of BT's Mis-Us explains why some try to
    communicate with pictures.

         Since this can cause a case to hang fire in auditing you need to
    know about this and to check for a Mis-U in the auditing command or
    question, remembering that it could be a BT's Mis-U and not
    necessarily the Pre-OT's Mis-U. So auditors and C/Ses are alerted to
    this as a possible reason for a case to hang fire. The remedy is to
    repair the situation, by checking for Mis-Us in the commands or
    auditing questions, and handling BTs hung up in these.

                                - 1 -

    HCOB 22.2.79

         As a rundown you would take these up by categories and fully
    handle them as follows. But this as a rundown comes later on in NED
    for OTs.

    1.   Clear with the Pre-OT the idea of communicating with
         BTs by concept, not with words. The Pre-OT may have
         to learn this trick of communicating conceptually.
         Clear the words "concept", "idea", "thought", "spoken
         words", "written words", "picture". Then clear the
         idea of communicating conceptually. You may have
         to do a little drill with the person by getting him/
         her to think a simple thought, such a "It's a nice
         day", without verbalizing it or thinking in words or
         pictures. You could have the person think the thought
         conceptually, then think it with words, then concep-
         tually, then with words. Or even think the thought
         while saying different words or gobble-dy-gook. Don't
         overdo this, it is just to get the Pre-OT to a point
         where he can communicate to a BT conceptually.

    2.   Assess through these categories until you get a read:

         "A BT with a Mis-U..........

            in auditing commands?

            in auditing questions?

            in spoken words?

            in reading matter?

            in entertainment?

            in study?

            in English?

            in foreign languages?

            symbol?

            sound?

    3.   Have the Pre-OT locate where the BT is in relationship
         to the body.

    4.   Blow the BT by usual NED for OTs techniques (What?
         Who?), remembering that the Pre-OT must ask these
         questions (and receive the answers to them) concep-
         tually, so as to avoid Mis-U words in this communi-
         cation.

                                - 2 -

    HCOB 22.2.79

    5.   Check for any other BT within this category and
         handle as above, until there are no more BTs with
         Mis-Us in this category.

    6.   Continue down the assessment in #2 above until you
         get a read and handle as above, and so on.

    7.   When you have completed the categories given above,
         make a final check for any other BT with a Mis-U,
         and handle before leaving this Rundown.

         This discovery shows the importance of clearing words used in
    auditing questions and commands, and the importance of clearing Mis-U
    words in general. And of course the fact that these Mis-Us may be a
    BT's Mis-Us rather than the person's own Mis-Us, will dispel any
    mystery about why one can run into Mis-U word phenomena when one knows
    the word himself. But don't let this make you any less alert for
    words the Pre-OT may have misunderstood in auditing questions or
    commands, and be sure to clear these.

         These BT with Mis-Us are easily handled by use of the trick of
    communicating with them conceptually, rather than with words.

                                                   L. RON HUBBARD
                                                   FOUNDER

    LRH:dm:kjm
    Copyright (c) 1978
    by L. Ron Hubbard
    ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

3 III

                    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
              _Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex_

                 _HCO BULLETIN OF 23 DECEMBER 1979_
      _LIMITED_
      _DISTRIBUTION_
    OT III & above Only
    NED for OTs Auditors
    AO Review Auditors
     OT III
    ACS Checksheet
    Class XII
    OT III Cramming
     Officers
    OT III C/Ses
               _Qual Corrective Actions on OTs Series 2_

                      _C O N F I D E N T I A L_

                  _FLYING RUDS AT OT III AND ABOVE_

    _References:_
    HCOB 4 Jul 79 HANDLING CORRECTION LISTS ON OTs
    Scientology Axiom 29

                            _MISOWNERSHIP_

         Scientology Axiom 29: "In order to cause an As-is-ness
    to persist, one must assign other authorship to the creation
    than his own. Otherwise his view of it would cause its van-
    ishment." This axiom is especially relevant to auditing at
    the level of OT III and above because at this level the Pre-
    OT is handling other beings than himself (BTs and clusters).
    It is necessary to establish correct ownership of charge in
    order to get an As-is-ness. Furthermore, incorrectly assign-
    ing charge to the wrong being can cause by-passed charge (BPC)
    as it is now misowned. Hence the instruction in the OT III
    materials that one must use a narrow attention span so as to
    handle one BT or cluster at a time, and so as not to restim-
    ulate or confuse other BTs with the one being audited.

         Finding more than one charge without establishing whose
    charge it is, and fully handling that being, can result in a
    generality - the idea that the charge found belongs to all -
    when it only belongs to one being. This can cause an ARC
    break or BPC reaction as it acts as a wrong indication to the
    others to whom it does not belong. By correctly establishing
    ownership of charge, and handling the correct charge on the
    being to whom it belongs, you get As-is-ness.

         It is especially important that AO Review Auditors and
    OT III Cramming Officers know this data and correctly handle
    rudiments and prepared list reads in sessions and in Cramming.

    HCOB 22.12.79
    Confidential                - 2 -

                        _HOW TO FLY THE RUDS_

         The Rudiments questions which contain the word "you"
    (i.e. "Do you have an ARC break?") are for use on lower level
    pcs, but not at OT III or above. When the word "you" is used
    in a ruds question on a Pre-OT who is OT III or above, it is
    evaluative. It says whose charge it is.

         The correct wording of ruds questions for use on Pre-OTs
    who are OT III or above is:

         "Is there an ARC break?"

         "Is there a present time problem?"

         "Is there a withhold?"

         "Is there an overt?"

    And where full ruds are being flown"

         "Is there an invalidation?"

         "Is there an evaluation?"

         Sometimes the rudiments will run and F/N and blow just
    that rudiment alone, and without differentiating whose charge it
    is. It is possible that the Pre-OT isn't up to differentiating
    whose it is. This is how rudiments run all the time on lower
    level cases. It just runs generally as the rudiment, without
    establishing whose it is. The trouble you can get into is with
    misownership, whereby you are running a charge that belongs
    to a BT as if it were the Pre-OT's charge. Or the charge of
    one BT is misowned as belonging to some other BT or cluster.
    Then misownership of charge occurs, it won't run or as-is or
    blow, you can't F/N it, and it will start turning on more charge
    or solidity. If you get into this sort of situation, realize
    that the trouble is caused by misownership and handle accord-
    ingly. But if when flying a rudiment, or other charge found
    such as a reading line on a prepared list, if it just runs and
    blows, realize you've had a lucky break. Don't interrupt it
    to try to find out whose it is, or try to take it up again
    after it has blown. This is obvious enough because as soon as
    you get onto the reading rudiment or reading line the charge
    starts coming off, and the whole thing F/Ns and blows. This
    is a special condition and if this doesn't occur, you proceed
    as follows.

         By using "Is there an(a) . . .?" you are not evaluating
    whose charge it is. Then the auditor can establish whose
    charge it is by asking: "Is (charge found) yours? a BT's, a

    HCOB 22.12.79
    Confidential                - 3 -

    cluster's?" and indicate which of these read. (Sometimes you
    may find that a charge can belong to and read on more that one
    of the above, in which case you would handle both reads. It
    is possible that an ARC break for example could be shared with
    all present, and would simply run as the ARC break, generally
    without establishing whose it is. And there is a condition
    where you may find for example that it is the Pre-OT's own
    rud, and _also_ a BT's or cluster's. The question: "Is it also
    (yours?) (a BT's?) (a cluster's?)" would be used in this case.

         Unless you get a discharge and blow of the rud as described
    above, it is essential to find out if any charge found belongs
    really to a BT or cluster, _when_ the charge is found. Don't F/N
    all the ruds for example and then ask "Are all these . .?" is wrong
    as that would generalize it. The rule is on ruds, or on a pre-
    pared list, or when finding a charge on a case, _at_ _once_ find
    if that charge belongs to a BT or cluster, and _find_where_the_
    _BT_or_cluster_is_ and limit the Pre-OT's attention to that spe-
    cific area while F/Ning the read. _And_then_take_any_added_
    _steps_to_blow_that_BT_or_cluster,_and_blow_it._

         Then the auditor continues on down the rudiments questions
    to the next reading rudiment and handles it as above.

                              _CAUTION_

         The ruds question: "Is there a(an) . . .?" can be asked
    of any case, but the remainder of the above does not apply to
    cases below OT III and must _never_ be mentioned to such a case.

                                                   L. RON HUBBARD
                                                   FOUNDER

    LRH:dm:kjm
    Copyright  1979
    by L. Ron Hubbard
    ALL RIGHTS RESERVED