      HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE

Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex



     HCO BULLETIN OF 23 AUGUST 1971



Remimeo

All Auditors

C/Ses

SHSBC

Academy Level IV

Class VIIIs

HGCs

Class VIII Checksheet

Class VI Checksheet

Class III Checksheet

C/S Course Checksheet

HSST

Interns





             C/S Series 1



           AUDITOR'S RIGHTS





   AUDITOR RESPONSIBILITY FOR C/Ses



An auditor who receives a Case Supervisor direction (C/S) of what 

to audit on a pc is NOT discharged of his responsibility as an 

auditor.



THE AUDITOR HAS A SERIES OF RESPONSIBILITIES THAT ARE PART OF 

EVERY C/S HE GETS TO AUDIT.



           ACCEPTING THE PC



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

pc is assigned to him.



If an auditor does not believe he can help that particular pc or 

if he dislikes auditing that particular pc, the auditor has a 

right to refuse to audit that pc.



The auditor must state why.



The Case Supervisor, Director of Processing or Director of Review 

or any of their seniors may not discipline the auditor for 

refusing to audit a particular pc.



An auditor who refuses to audit his quota of hours or sessions is 

of course subject to action.



Thus, refusing to audit a particular pc, so long as one is not 

refusing to audit other pcs, is not actionable.



"I do not wish to audit this pc because ________. I am willing to 

audit other pcs," is the legal auditor statement in the matter.



Some pcs get a bad name with some auditors, some don't appreciate 

the auditing, some conflict with a particular auditor's own 

personality. There are such instances. It does not mean certain 

pcs cannot be helped by others.



It is also true that an auditor who dislikes a pc may not do a 

good job, so the rule also has a practical side to it.



One auditor disliked young men and did a bad job on them. Another 

disliked old ladies and chopped them up in session. One pc had 

messed up several Scientologists and couldn't find anyone to 

audit him at all.



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



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

given.



             ACCEPTING A C/S



When the auditor gets a C/S to do on a case and if he thinks it 

Is not the correct thing to do, he has the right to reject the 

C/S for that pc and require another one he can agree to.



The auditor does not have the right to start doing a C/S and 

change it during the session except as noted below.



The auditor may NOT C/S in the auditing chair while auditing the 

pc. If he has NO Case Supervisor at all, the auditor still audits 

from a C/S. He writes the C/S before session and adheres to it in 

session. To do something else and not follow the C/S Is called 

"C/Sing in the chair" and is very poor form as it leads to Q and 

A.



             STALEDATED C/S



A C/S that is a week or two old or a Repair (Progress) Program 

that is a month or two old is dynamite.



This is called a "Staledated Program" or a "Staledated C/S," 

meaning it is too old to be valid.



It should have been done sooner. The pc of last week when the C/S 

was written may have been well and happily employed but a week 

later may have headaches and a reprimand from the boss.



It is dangerous to accept a Repair (Progress) Program if it is 

old.



The auditor who sees his C/S is old and sees the pc has bad 

indicators is justified in demanding a fresh C/S giving his 

reasons why.



A program written in January may be completely out of date in 

June. Who knows what may have happened in between.



Use fresh C/Ses and fresh programs.



Staledates only occur in poorly run backlogged divisions anyway. 

The real remedy is reorganize and hire more and better auditors.



            ENDING THE SESSION



When the C/S he has is proving unworkable during the session, the 

auditor has a right to end the session and send the folder to the 

C/S.



Ending the session is totally up to the auditor.



If the auditor just doesn't complete an action that was producing 

TA and could be completed, it is of course a flunk. Such a case 

is just not running a basic engram the one more time through that 

would bring the TA down and give a proper end phenomena. This and 

similar actions would be an auditor error.



The judgment here is whether or not the auditor's action is 

justified in ending the session.



Even though he may have made an error, the auditor cannot be 

blamed for the ending off of the session as that is totally up to 

him. He can be given a flunk for the error.



          AUDITING OVER OUT-RUDS



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

AUDITING ERROR.



Even if the C/S omits "Fly a rud" or "Fly ruds," this does not 

justify the auditor from auditing the pc over out-ruds.



The auditor can do one of two things: He can fly all ruds or he 

can return the folder and request ruds be flown.



The DIANETIC AUDITOR is not excused from auditing over out-ruds 

and in an HGC must be specially cautioned not to do so but return 

the folder for a new C/S. Better still he should learn to fly 

ruds.



          INABILITY TO FLY RUDS



If an auditor cannot get a rud to F/N, cannot get any rud to F/N, 

he is Justified in starting a Green Form.



The auditor solution to no F/N on ruds is to do a GF whether the 

C/S said to or not.



This is an expected action.



It is understood the auditor would use Suppress and False in 

trying to fly ruds.



           SESSIONS FAR APART



When a pc has not had a session for some time, or when a pc gets 

sessions days apart, RUDS MUST BE FLOWN. Otherwise, the pc will 

get audited over out-ruds. This can develop mental mass.



Optimum session scheduling is a series of sessions or a whole 

program done in a block of sessions close together. This prevents 

the world from throwing the pc's ruds out between sessions.



Giving sessions far apart barely keeps up with life. The auditing 

time is absorbed in patching life up.



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



             UNREADING ITEMS



When an item the auditor has been told to run doesn't read on the 

meter, even when the auditor puts in Suppress and Invalidate on 

it, the auditor MUST NOT do anything with the item no matter what 

the C/S said.



It is expected he will see if it reads and use Suppress and 

Invalidate on it. And if it still doesn't read, he will be 

expected NOT to run it.



                 LISTS



When an auditor whose C/S told him to list "Who or what _____" or 

any list question finds that the list question does not read, the 

auditor MUST NOT list it.



When doing a list ordered by the C/S, it is assumed that the 

auditor will test it for read before listing and that he will NOT 

list an unreading question. (A read is an actual fall, not a tick 

or a stop.)



              LIST TROUBLE



When an auditor has trouble doing a list and getting an item, it 

is expected he will use a prepared list like L4B to locate the 

trouble and handle it.



As it is very hard on a pc to mess up a list, it is expected the 

auditor will handle the situation then and there with no further 

C/S directions.



                HIGH TA



When the auditor sees the TA is high at session start yet the C/S 

says to "Fly a rud" or run a chain, the AUDITOR MUST NOT TRY TO 

FLY A RUD and he must not start on a chain.



Trying to bring a TA down with ARC breaks or ruds is very hard on 

a pc as ARC breaks aren't the reason TAs go up.



Seeing a high TA at start, the Dianetic auditor or Scientology 

auditor up to Class II does not start the session but sends the 

folder back to the C/S and for a higher class auditor to do.



Seeing a high TA at start, the Scientology auditor (Class III or 

above) (a) checks for exteriorization in a recent session and if 

so the session is ended and the C/S is asked for an 

"Interiorization Rundown"; (b) if the pc has had an 

Interiorization Rundown, the auditor asks the C/S for permission 

to do a "C/S Series 53" or a Hi-Lo TA assessment or whatever the 

C/S indicates. The Int RD may have been (usually is) overrun and 

needs rehab or correction and it is usual to check it -- it is 

included in a "C/S 53" and a Hi-Lo TA.



These actions are expected of the auditor even when not stated in 

the C/S.



             GOING ON HOPING



When a case is running badly session to session, the LAST thing 

you do is go on hoping, either in auditing or C/Sing.



"Let's try ______," "Then this," "Then this," is not going to 

solve the case.



YOU GET DATA. You can get data by a White Form (Pc Assessment 

Form). You can get data from a GF fully assessed (Method 5). You 

can get data by 2-way comm on various subjects. You can have the 

D of P interview and get answers. You can even ask his mother.



You look for case errors. You study the folder back to where the 

pc ran well and then come forward and you'll find the error every 

time.



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

pure idiocy.



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

the folder.



FIND THE BUG!



Ah, good Lord, he is a Pinkerton agent sworn to secrecy! He does 

yoga exercises after every session. He was tried for murder when 

he was 16 and nobody has run the engram of it.



Various auditors ran the same engram chain four times.



An auditor ran Int RD twice.



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



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



A dozen dozen reasons can exist.



An auditor does NOT let a C/S C/S hopefully. He refuses the C/Ses 

until a Folder Error Summary is done and the bug found.



            THINGS DONE TWICE



By carelessness the same rundowns can be called for twice and 

done twice or even more.



A Folder Summary inside the front cover must exist and must be 

kept up.



Over it there must be a program on which the case is being 

audited. But just because it's covered, never neglect entering a 

session and what was run on the Folder Summary (FS).



If  Hold It Still is ordered, see if it was run before.



Don't let major rundowns be done twice.



DIANETIC ITEMS must NEVER be run twice. Dianetic lists must not 

be scattered through a folder. Bring them together and keep them 

together and being brought forward.



                  COPY



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

lists.



Keep all admin neat and in the original form.



Copying makes errors possible.



             RUDS GOING OUT



When the ruds go out during the session, the auditor recognizes 

the following:



Pc Critical = W/H from auditor



Pc Antagonistic = BPC in session



No TA = Problem



Tired = Failed Purpose or no sleep



Sad = ARC Break



Soaring TA = Overrun or Protest



Dope Off = Bypassed F/N or not enough sleep



No Interest = Out-ruds or no interest in the first place.



An auditor who isn't sure what it is but runs into trouble with 

the pc (except on lists which he handles at once always) is smart 

to end off the session quickly, write down the full observation 

and get it to the C/S.



The auditor who is an old hand and knows what he is looking at as 

per above scale (and the C/S the C/S would give) handles it 

promptly.



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



Pc Antagonistic = BPC = assess proper list (such as L1C) and 

handle.



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



Tired = no sleep or Failed Purpose = check which it is and 

handle.



Sad = ARC Break = locate and handle, itsa earlier itsa.



Soaring TA = Overrun or Protest = find which and handle. Such an 

O/R is usually by rehab.



Dope Off = lack of sleep or bypassed F/N = check on sleep, or 

rehab F/N.



No Interest = no interest in first place or out-ruds = check for 

interest or put in ruds.



List goes wrong BPC = handle or do L4B or any L4 at once.



Ruds won't fly some other error = assess GF and handle.



The auditor has no business trying to do the C/S given when it 

collides with and isn't designed to handle any of the above.



If the previous session disclosed such an error and this session 

C/S was designed to handle and doesn't, the auditor should end 

off and the next C/S should be "2-way comm for data."



             CASE NOT HANDLED



When the auditor or the Examiner collides with a pc who is 

asserting his case has not been handled, there should not be a 

new set of actions based on little data but the auditor should 

end off and the C/S should order a "2-way comm on what hasn't 

been handled."



The auditor should not at once take this up as part of any other 

C/S.



In other words, an auditor doesn't change the C/S to a 2-way comm 

on something not called for by C/S.



              MAJOR ACTIONS



An auditor should never begin a major action on a case that is 

not "set up" for it.



As this can occur during a session, it is vital to understand the 

rule and follow it. Otherwise, a case can be bogged right down 

and will be hard to salvage as now a new action to repair has 

been added to an unrepaired action. Now, if the auditor starts a 

major action on a case not "set up," we get 2 things to repair 

where we only had 1, as the major action won't work either.



Repair = patching up past auditing or recent life errors. This is 

done by prepared lists or completing the chain or correcting 

lists or even 2-way comm or Prepchecks on auditors, sessions, 

etc.



Rudiments = setting the case up for the session action. This 

includes ARC breaks, PTPs, W/Hs, GF or Overrun listing or any 

prepared list (such as L1C, etc.).



Set up = getting an F/N showing and VGIs before starting any 

major action. It means just that -- an F/N and VGIs before 

starting any major action. Such may require a repair action and 

rudiments as well.



Major Action = any -- but any -- action designed to change a case 

or general considerations or handle continual illness or improve 

ability. This means a process or even a series of processes like 

3 flows. It doesn't mean a grade. It is any process the case 

hasn't had.



Grade = a series of processes culminating in an exact ability 

attained, examined and attested to by the pc.



Program = any series of actions designed by a C/S to bring about 

definite results in a pc. A program usually includes several 

sessions.



The vast bulk of auditing errors come about because C/Ses and 

auditors seek to use a major action to repair a case.



It is a responsibility of an auditor to reject a C/S which seeks 

to use one or more major actions to repair a case that isn't 

running well.



The auditor must understand this completely. He can be made to 

accept a wrong C/S for the pc and even more importantly can in 

his own session make the error and mess up the case.



Example: Pc has not been running well (no real TA or had a grumpy 

Exam Report). Auditor sees C/S has ordered a major action, not a 

repair by prepared lists, ruds, etc. The auditor must reject the 

C/S as he will be made to fail in session by it.



Example: Auditor gets a C/S, "(1) Fly a rud; (2) Assess LX3; (3) 

Run 3-way recall, 3-way secondaries, 3-way engrams on all / / X 

items." The auditor can't get a rud to fly. Does the LX3. In 

other words, he flunks by failing to SET UP the case. It could 

also go this way. Auditor can't get a rud to fly, does a GF, gets 

no F/N. He MUST NOT begin a major action but MUST end off right 

there.



It is fatal to begin any new process on the case designed to 

change the case if the case is not F/N VGIs.



The pc who starts processing for the first time and is surely not 

F/N VGIs must be set up by repair actions! Simple rudiments, life 

ruds, O/R list on life, even assessing prepared lists on life, 

these are repair actions. The pc will sooner or later begin to 

fly. Now at session start you put in a rud, get F/N VGIs and CAN 

start major actions.



So the auditor has a responsibility not to be led up a garden 

path by a C/S which orders a major action on a pc who isn't 

repaired or by not being able in session to get an F/N VGIs by 

repair.



The only exceptions are a Touch Assist or Life Ruds or the 

Dianetic Assist all on a temporarily sick pc. But that's repair, 

isn't it?



            PROGRAM VIOLATIONS



When an auditor receives a C/S and sees that it violates the pc's 

program, he should reject it.



The pc, let us say, is supposed to finish his Dianetic Triples 

but is suddenly being given a Group Engram Intensive. That 

violates the program and also the grade.



If the pc is running badly, a repair should be ordered. If not, 

the program should be completed.



Example: An effort is being made to get the pc to go backtrack. 

This is a program containing several major actions which probably 

consists of several sessions. Before this program is complete and 

before the pc has gone backtrack, the C/S orders "(1) Fly a rud, 

(2) 3 S&Ds." The auditor should recognize in 3 S&Ds a major 

action being run into the middle of a program and reject it. The 

correct action is of course the next backtrack process.



            GRADE VIOLATIONS



A pc who is on a grade and hasn't attained it yet must not be 

given major actions not part of that grade.



Example: Pc is on Grade I. C/S orders a list having to do with 

drinking. It is not a process on that grade. It could be done 

after Grade I is attained and before Grade II is begun. The C/S 

is incorrect and should not be accepted.



            ABILITY ATTAINED



Now and then before the full major action is complete or before 

all the grade processes are run, the pc will attain the ability 

of the grade or the end phenomena of the action.



This is particularly true of valence shifters or Interiorization 

Rundowns and can happen in grades.



The auditor should recognize it and, with the F/N VGIs always 

present at such moments, end off.



I know of one case who had a huge cog about Interiorization on 

Flow I Engrams and was pushed by both C/S and auditor to do Flows 

2 and 3 who bogged so badly that it took a long while -- weeks -- 

to straighten the case out.



The ability itself gets invalidated by pushing on.



On the other hand, this should never be taken as an excuse. "I 

think he cogged to himself so we ended off." It must be a real 

"What do you know!" sort of out-loud cog with a big F/N and VVGIs 

and directly on the subject to end off a major action or a 

program or a grade before its actions are all audited.



            REVIEWING REVIEWS



An auditor who gets a C/S or an order to repair a case that is 

running well should reject doing the action.



I have seen a case ordered to repair who had Ext Full Perception 

Doing Great. The repair bogged the case. The case then got 

running well again but a second C/S ordered a new repair which of 

course bogged it. Then major actions were done. The case was 

again repaired and rehabbed and became okay. Three times the 

auditor should have said NO.



              FALSE REPORTS



The vilest trick that can be played on a pc is for an auditor to 

falsify an auditing report.



It may be thought to be "good public relations" (good PR) for the 

auditor with the C/S.



Actually, it buries an error and puts the pc at risk.



INTEGRITY is a hallmark of Dianetics and Scientology.



Just because psychiatrists were dishonest is no reason for 

auditors to be.



The results are there to be gotten.



False reports like false attests recoil and badly on both the 

auditor and pc.



             OVERTS ON PCs



When an auditor finds himself being nattery or critical of his 

pcs, he should get his withholds on pcs pulled and overts on them 

off.



An auditor who goes sad is auditing pcs over his own ARC break.



An auditor worried about his pc is working over a problem.



Getting one's ruds in on pcs or C/Ses or the org can bring new 

zest to life.



        AUDITORS DON'T HAVE CASES



In the chair no auditor has a case.



If breath shows on a mirror held to his face, he can audit.



Faint afterwards if you must but see that the pc gets to the 

Examiner with his F/N.



Then get yourself handled.



          "WHAT HE DID WRONG"



An auditor has a right to know what he did wrong, in the session 

that went wrong.



Most often a sour session occurs only when the rules and data in 

this HCOB have been violated.



But an auditor's TRs can go out or his listing and nulling is in 

error.



After a session that went wrong, somebody else (not the auditor) 

should ask the pc what the auditor did. This sometimes spots a 

false auditing report. But it also sometimes is a false report by 

the pc.



In any event, the auditor has a right to know. Then he can either 

correct his auditing or his know-how or he can advise the C/S the 

pc's report is untrue and better repair can be done on the pc.



Savage action against an auditor is almost never called for. He 

was trying to help. Some people are hard to help.



Not only does an auditor have the right to be told what was wrong 

but he must be given the exact HCOB, date and title, that he 

violated.



Never take a verbal or written correction that is not in an HCOB 

or tape.



Don't be party to a "hidden-data line" that doesn't exist.



"You ruined the pc!" is not a valid statement. "You violated HCOB 

page ____" is the charge.



No auditor may be disciplined for asking, "May I please have the 

tape or HCOB that was violated so I can read it or go to 

Cramming."



If it isn't on a tape, a book or an HCOB, IT IS NOT TRUE and no 

auditor has to accept any criticism that is not based on the 

actual source data.



"If it isn't written, it isn't true" is the best defense and the 

best way to improve your tech.



               ----------



These are the rights of the auditor with relation to a C/S. They 

are all technical rights based on sound principles.



An auditor should know them and use them.



If an auditor stands on these rights and gets beaten down, he 

should put all the facts before his nearest OTL or SO ship, as 

something would be very wrong somewhere.



Auditing is a happy business -- when it is done right.





L. RON HUBBARD

Founder



LRH:nt.jh.gm



