We have today three major processes (and are about to get the bit of Class IV). These processes are:
Into this scheme of things the CCHs loom largely. They are our foremost “familiarization” processes that permit the pc to confront control and duplication.
In actual fact 3D Criss Cross goes “further south” than Prepchecking. And the CCHs go, of course, much further south than 3D Criss Cross.
The whole criteria is tone arm motion. If you do not get more than a quarter of a division of tone arm motion in 20 minutes of Prepchecking or 3D Criss Cross, the pc probably should be run on the CCHs.
Here is a matter of no matter why there is no tone arm action, just put the pc on CCHs. As Mary Sue has said, this is a boon to any D of P. The D of P simply sees that the pc is getting only slight tone arm action after a session or two and then puts the pc on CCHs with no further reasoning or figure-figure on the case.
It does not matter why the pc gets slight tone arm action. It could be that the auditor is running the wrong Zero questions. It could be the way the auditor or the pc is doing or not doing. Don’t try extensively to figure out why no Tone Arm Action, just transfer the pc to the CCHs.
For how long? Until all CCHs (1 to 4) are runnable without somatics and reasonably flat.
This way you’ll get more wins, better gains.
Here is a typical case in point. A case was audited on Routine 3D, 3D XX, SecChecking and Prepchecking for 260 hours. In all that time one half a tone arm division was all the change except during one series of 4 sessions when she got one tone arm division on one particular Zero question. At the end of this time the pc had made some small gains but was still incapable of recognizing her own overts. It would have been far better to have run a hundred hours of the CCHs first.
On this case, and others, the only significant tone arm action was achieved by tactile havingness (touching things), which always brought the tone arm down one division. Tactile havingness, as you will see, is a CCH type of process.
Thus one concludes that the CCHs (even though pcs are not metered of course while doing CCHs) produced tone arm action while the higher level processes did not.
Therefore, a helpful (but not final) test. If you get no real tone arm action on Prepchecking or 3D Criss Cross listing and nulling, and you do get tone arm action asking the pc to touch things (laying down and picking up the cans often to check the TA position) you have a CCH pc. But this test is not needful if you just follow the rule, “No TA action on 3D Criss Cross or Prepchecking more than a quarter of a division every 20 minutes, transfer the pc to CCHs.”Here is another test, which has sense but again is not vital to make. If the pc gets tone arm motion just discussing being audited, and relatively little in Prepchecking or 3D Criss Cross, it’s timesaving to transfer the case to the CCHs.
If you notice lots of TA action on Havingness and little tone arm action on Prepchecking or 3D Criss Cross, you have a clear indication that CCHs will be all that will move the case.
If you notice lots of TA action on trying to clear the auditor in the rudiments it’s probably best to use the CCHs. Now if only rudiments type Zero questions (beginning and end rudiments) move the TA in Prepchecking, but other things don’t, it’s a CCH case.
If the pc, for whatever reason, doesn’t get tone arm action from any verbal process, old-time, or current, don’t investigate the reason. It may lie with the auditor or pc. Just change over to the CCHs.
If you like, you can use a meter to handle beginning and end rudiments on a pc you’re running on the CCHs. It would probably help and make things run faster. This is not mandatory, but knowing what we do about withholds, it might be safer.
Remember, the CCHs must be run right. The two bulletins best covering them are: HCO Bulletin of November 2, 1961, “Training CCHs” HCO Bulletin of June 23, 1961, “Running CCHs”
Even if you think you know all about the CCHs, read these two bulletins again before you attempt them.
The CCHs expired in value after 1957 because the original method of running them was altered. There’s only one way to run the CCHs and you have both the above bulletins to tell you how. They’re the original CCHs and the original method of running them.
This then is the third bulletin in this sequence. It tells you when to run the CCHs. HCO Bulletin of November 2, 1961, tells you how each one is run. HCO Bulletin of June 23, 1961, tells you how they’re run as a series on a pc. And now we can state here When.
A lot of stuff about CCHs being only for psychos has not helped their use. We now find that cases a long way from psycho won’t move easily unless the CCHs are used first.
“A lot of Tone Arm Motion” is defined as at least three-quarters of a division motion on the Tone Arm dial in any 20 minutes of auditing.
“Not much Tone Arm Motion” is defined as one-quarter of a division of Tone Arm Motion in 20 minutes of auditing.
Judgment must be used in this, of course. You can have a pc who usually gets good Tone Arm Motion but, for a session, gets little. That doesn’t mean jump to the CCHs. If the pc is routinely subject to Not Much Tone Arm Motion, you must switch to the CCHs.
Ds of P, Staff Auditors, and Field Auditors, watch the auditor’s reports and look back through the pc’s file. You’ll find a lot of enlightenment on why the pc was “tough”. No Tone Arm Motion.
I hope this sorts it out for you. It has for me.
[HCO B 2 Nov. 61, Training CCHs, was not by LRH and is not in these volumes. See page 310 for the revision of HCO B]