First – only graduates of ACCs including the 5th London October 1958, and after are qualified to run engrams by Scientology processes. This does not include Dianetic processing of engrams which can be done by anyone but is not allowed in HGCs. Reason: Scientology processing of engrams is too strong for most untrained personnel and better results are obtained by HGC wholly repetitive processes. Stable Data: The HGC has the responsibility of using only the processes which obtain the highest results. A Director of Processing must bring about only the use of the best processes.

For wholly repetitive command clearing processes, see other bulletins. Engram running with Scientology processes in unschooled hands does not bring about bettered cases by actual test. This is evidently due to the roughness of the auditing and failures to handle ARC breaks. ACC trained personnel therefore, are the only ones qualified or permitted to run engrams in an HGC.

Finding the engram necessary to resolve the case is done by an E-Meter and finger snaps. The E-Meter is the final check. If an E-Meter is stuck on the pc or Stage Four (rises, sticks, falls in a repetitive cycle and reacts on nothing else) CCH processes may be used or preferably, the 3 commands of Factual Havingness (8 of vanish, 2 of continue, to one of have).

The experience necessary to resolve the case is the engram asked for. It is run back in time and located exactly in time. The falls of the needle are the equivalent of a "yes" answer to the auditor's question. Only the time is isolated, not the content. The time may turn out to be a span of years. The incident may be even a century in length.

In a rough case some current lifetime "lock" may be the incident. In a very rough (unreality) case, the "engram" necessary to resolve the case may be the moment the pc walked into the room.

In a majority of cases however the "engram necessary to resolve the case" is a past death, complete with its accompanying overt act. Its place in time is the concern of the auditor. Questions such as "Greater than five hundred years?" "Less than five hundred years?" narrow the time down precisely. Several incidents may be located in passing.

Run that incident which has the steepest fall. Don't run the earliest necessarily. In case of doubt as to which of two falls most pick a later incident (closer to p. t.) as it will actually be easier for the pc to confront it.

With this incident selected, don't then change it or let the pc change it. Don't start to run one incident and then change to another ever. What you pick, flatten. To change is to pretty well lose the whole case. We aren't interested here in the significance of what running it does for the case.