3. Two understudies who have had good HPA training and who need some real brush up to Class II.
[See HCOPL 26May61 "Modification of HPA/HCA, BScn/HCS Schedule" Per this P/L, the HPA course consists of two Units: Unit 1 and Unit 2. Unit 1 consists of TR's, metering, model session, and ruds; Unit 2 consists of the 36 pre-sessions, finding the Hav and confront process for the PC, general assessment and running pcs on prehav scale (not SOP Goals), and sec checking.]
[For definition of classes of auditors, see HCOPL 29Sep61 "HGC Allowed Processes" Class I refers to relatively unskilled HCA/HPA graduated or field or staff auditors, etc. This auditor is allowed to audit only a process that he has had success with on pcs, regardless of the HGC pcs case requirements. Class II auditors have passed HCO quizzes on E-meter essentials, Model Session, sec checking, and tape 6109C26 SHSpec-58 "Teaching the Field -- Sec Checks". They are only allowed to audit sec checks. Class III auditors may audit Routine 3, but not run engrams. Class IV auditors are releases, have had their goal and terminal found, and have had engrams run on their goals terminal chain and have excellent subjective reality on engrams. These auditors may run Routine 3 and engrams on HGC pcs.]
Unless an auditor has these things, he will get no auditing done. He'll either spend all his time setting up cases or, more likely, he will try to assess a Routine 3D on someone who isn't set up and fall on his head. He also needs someone to handle the admin end. You can easily get pcs with an ad like "You can always talk to a scientologist about your difficulties." Having someone doing admin is always a security that the people you help will pay you for the service.
It is not really too bad that it takes some skill to apply Routine 3D. If you let loose a powerful technology which anyone at all could apply, you'd be in trouble. Technology that doesn't require a skilled applicator is what this world mainly suffers from. For instance, any government official can push the button on an atomic bomb. If tech requires no skill, you can't build an ethic into it.
The broad program on which we are operating is concise and broad. We have central organizations and offices all over Earth which suffer mainly from lack of technology. That they will now have. The policy is to build in self-reliance within a fixed pattern in the central orgs. Field auditors have been attempting to put up a standard and having it collapse. They generally don't get as consistently good results as HGC's, which is why HGC's got started in the first place. The basic reason for success in the HGC's is the stiffer discipline there. The central organization, as long as it is impoverished and feeling bad, tends to go into games conditions with other orgs or field auditors. This is simply because of lack of success. When there's scarcity and havingness is low, there's a games condition. Scarcity is repaired by technical excellence.
The briefing course was instituted for only one reason: to get the highest possible level of technology.
Step 6 would work today, but in fact it didn't work because it was never done. In running Step 6, before you had the PC make the object bigger, smaller, etc., you had to find a null object on the E-meter. Wherever it beefed up banks, a null object wasn't found. Relate it to the GPM -- if you found an object which quivered on the meter, you would be onto the GPM and you wouldn't dare to do anything with it. But you could take something not related to the GPM and exercise the PC on creating and mocking it up without antagonizing or messing up particularly the GPM. The PC with some of the automaticities of mocking things up off could theoretically have the GPM evaporate.
[Details on running Routine 3D]
A Q and A puts the withhold in to stay. When the PC gives you the withhold, that is all you need. If it still registers, there's another withhold. It's not more on the withhold he has given you. The reason you vary the question in sec checking is just to get more withholds, to help the PC out. But you always end up by asking the original question to see if it is cleared. If you add any new sec check questions, make them pertinent to what you are doing.
If a burst of misemotion occurs on a sec check or Class II activity, it is turned off by what turned it on. That is true of all secondaries, particularly of an assessment, running havingness, or a sec check question. If a withhold turned it on, some withhold is keeping it powered up. So get the withhold. If misemotion is turned on by havingness, you can find out what is happening if you like, but continue the process that turned it on. It's a cruelty to do otherwise, no matter how kind it may seem. Any other process you may switch to is so much less powerful than what you have been running that it won't handle the misemotion. It takes more of the same.
The greatest cruelty is being kind to the PC. It will not help a PC to omit sec checking him or to rush him into an assessment. He will never get through Routine 3D levels if you do. If you left a sec check question unflat in one session, don't spend the session getting ruds in. Flatten the question. If the TA has soared meanwhile, find out what has been going on. If bypassing a PTP upsets the PC, go back to the earlier withhold that preceded it (It could be some undelivered comm).
If the session looks confused to the auditor, the PC will get upset. The PC is trying to make a session out of it, so he is harder to audit if the auditor is confused, because the PC reacts to the confusion of the auditor. An unskilled auditor has much tougher pcs than anybody else. Then, because it is all so complicated, the unskilled auditor sees nothing wrong with adding more complications, so he puts in additives. The job is to teach people not to put in lots of useless stuff. Keep it very simple and they will win.