       HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE

 Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex



      HCO BULLETIN OF 23 JUNE 1980RA

        RE-REVISED 25 OCTOBER 1983



Remimeo

All Auditors

C/Ses

Academy Levels

Tech/Qual





   CHECKING QUESTIONS ON GRADES PROCESSES





  Refs:

  HCOB 12 June 70       C/S Series 2

                        PROGRAMING OF CASES

  HCO PL 17 June 70RB   KSW Series 5R

    Rev. 25.10.83       TECHNICAL DEGRADES

  HCOB 19 Apr. 72       KSW Series 8

                        C/S Series 77

                        "QUICKIE" DEFINED

  HCOB 3 Dec. 78        UNREADING FLOWS

  HCOB 27 May 70R       UNREADING QUESTIONS

    Rev. 3.12.78        AND ITEMS

  HCOB 8 June 61        E-METER WATCHING

  HCOB 7 May 69 IV      THE FIVE GAEs

  HCOB 22 Apr. 80       ASSESSMENT DRILLS





(The original version of HCOB 23 June 80 incorrectly stated that 

an auditor was not to check the processes of a grade for read 

before running them. That HCOB was then canceled on 25 Feb. 82 

and it remains canceled. The person who had originally approved

-- and even taken part in writing -- this incorrect and illegally 

issued HCOB later sought to cover these actions by "discovering 

the error," attributing it to someone else, and "calling it to my 

attention." With this re-revision, all earlier text written by 

others has simply been removed and further HCOB references have 

been added to the list above.)



EACH GRADE PROCESS THAT IS RUN ON A METER MUST BE CHECKED FOR A 

READ BEFORE IT IS RUN, AND IF NOT READING, IT IS NOT RUN AT THAT 

TIME.



This rule applies to subjective grade processes. It does not 

apply to processes that are not run on a meter such as Objective 

Processes or assists (except for metered assist actions of a 

subjective nature).



Actually, a process that "doesn't read" stems from one of three 

sources: (a) the process is not charged; (b) the process is 

invalidated or suppressed; or (c) ruds are out in session.



Factually, pc interest also plays a part in this.



I think quickying came from (1) auditors trying to push past the 

existing or persistent F/Ns or (2) auditors with TRs so poor that 

the pc was not in session. Nearly all grade processes and flows 

will read on pcs in that Grade Chart area unless the above two 

conditions are present.



One also doesn't make a big production of checking, as it 

distracts the pc. There is a system, one of many, one can use. 

One can say "The next process is (state wording of the auditing 

question)" and see if it reads. This does not take more than a 

glance. If no read but, more likely, if it isn't charged, an F/N 

or smoothly null needle, one hardly pauses and one adds "but are 

you interested in it?" Pc will consider it, and if not charged 

and pc in session, it will F/N or F/N more widely.



If charged, the pc would ordinarily put his attention on it and 

you'd get a fall or just a stopped F/N followed by a fall on the 

interest part of the question.



It takes pretty smooth auditing to do this and not miss. So if in 

doubt, one can again check the question. But never hound or 

harass a pc about it. Inexpert checking questions for read can 

result in a harassed pc and drive him out of session, so this 

auditing action, like any other, requires smooth auditing.





L. RON HUBBARD

Founder



LRH:rw.iw.gm



