All cases that come to the Qual Division are unusual.

All cases that come to the Qual Division are unusual.

The solution to ALL cases that come to the Qual Division is to do the USUAL.

The solution to ALL cases that come to the Qual Division is to do the USUAL.

If you don't hold on to that datum hard, all the "unusual" cases will soon have Review doing the unusual. And the only salvation for any Qual situation is to do the USUAL.

If you don't hold on to that datum hard, all the "unusual" cases will soon have Review doing the unusual. And the only salvation for any Qual situation is to do the USUAL.

Don't go into a dispersal because of the unusual nature of the Review cases. If they were standard they would not be in Review.

Don't go into a dispersal because of the unusual nature of the Review cases. If they were standard they would not be in Review.

But Review has a standard procedure. It is an Always, invariable standard procedure. Don't audit the case, audit the procedure. If you do so YOU WILL NEVER MISS. You will only miss if you get wrapped up in how unusual it all is.

But Review has a standard procedure. It is an Always, invariable standard procedure. Don't audit the case, audit the procedure. If you do so YOU WILL NEVER MISS. You will only miss if you get wrapped up in how unusual it all is.

Today Case Supervision and Review actions are all very, very standard. And very, very workable. You only get in a mess with a case when you don't use standard actions.

Today Case Supervision and Review actions are all very, very standard. And very, very workable. You only get in a mess with a case when you don't use standard actions.

It took more than a third of a century to find the keys to all cases. None is going to repeat all that research in the 20 minutes given to handle a case, so the best solution is to do what's known.

It took more than a third of a century to find the keys to all cases. None is going to repeat all that research in the 20 minutes given to handle a case, so the best solution is to do what's known.

When someone buys a Former Release Rehabilitation, he first goes to Review to get a check. This must be a perfunctory check. If you audit the pc you may float a needle on the check. The Review Auditor merely puts the pc who wants a Former Release check on a meter and asks: "Have you been Released earlier?" If it reads, THAT'S the end of the check. One says, "Yes you evidently were," and adds, "Go to the Registrar and get a Former Release Rehabilitation. " If it doesn't read it doesn't mean, not Former Release. THE PC MAY BE ARC BROKEN, and the meter of an ARC Broken pc may not read for the auditor. In fact an inexperienced auditor sometimes calls an ARC Broken needle a"floating needle" merely because it doesn't react to the auditor. So if the meter doesn't react on the question of was the pc a Former Release, all you do in Review is say, "There may be ARC Breaks around Former Release. It therefore doesn't read right now. It may read if the ARC Breaks are picked up," and sends the pc to the Registrar for Rehabilitation just the same.

When someone buys a Former Release Rehabilitation, he first goes to Review to get a check. This must be a perfunctory check. If you audit the pc you may float a needle on the check. The Review Auditor merely puts the pc who wants a Former Release check on a meter and asks: "Have you been Released earlier?" If it reads, THAT'S the end of the check. One says, "Yes you evidently were," and adds, "Go to the Registrar and get a Former Release Rehabilitation. " If it doesn't read it doesn't mean, not Former Release. THE PC MAY BE ARC BROKEN, and the meter of an ARC Broken pc may not read for the auditor. In fact an inexperienced auditor sometimes calls an ARC Broken needle a"floating needle" merely because it doesn't react to the auditor. So if the meter doesn't react on the question of was the pc a Former Release, all you do in Review is say, "There may be ARC Breaks around Former Release. It therefore doesn't read right now. It may read if the ARC Breaks are picked up," and sends the pc to the Registrar for Rehabilitation just the same.

In short two things can happen in a Former Release check. It reads. It doesn't read. In both cases send the pc to the Registrar for a Former Release Rehabilitation.

In short two things can happen in a Former Release check. It reads. It doesn't read. In both cases send the pc to the Registrar for a Former Release Rehabilitation.

So that action is real simple.

So that action is real simple.

What the pc says and does has nothing to do with it. Say what you have to to get the pc to the Registrar, but encourage no Itsa or you'll be tied up for an hour or two, working for nothing.

What the pc says and does has nothing to do with it. Say what you have to to get the pc to the Registrar, but encourage no Itsa or you'll be tied up for an hour or two, working for nothing.

If the pc has already been to the Registrar and bought a Former Release Rehabilitation then after the above check send the pc to the HGC Admin.

If the pc has already been to the Registrar and bought a Former Release Rehabilitation then after the above check send the pc to the HGC Admin.

That's all there is to it. You do anything else and you'll goof up everything. Start to audit the pc, invite the pc to Itsa, start picking up times or ARC Breaks and you've had it. You'll be wearing the HGC hat and costing the org money and slowing your own lines.

That's all there is to it. You do anything else and you'll goof up everything. Start to audit the pc, invite the pc to Itsa, start picking up times or ARC Breaks and you've had it. You'll be wearing the HGC hat and costing the org money and slowing your own lines.

Believe me, do just the above and NO MORE on a "Former Release check" in Review.

Believe me, do just the above and NO MORE on a "Former Release check" in Review.

Don't get all wound up in the guy's case. They're ALL different and unusual. That's no reason why a Former Release check should be unusual.

Don't get all wound up in the guy's case. They're ALL different and unusual. That's no reason why a Former Release check should be unusual.

Get it?

Get it?

When the Case Supervisor sends a pc already in the HGC to Review there is only ONE standard action:

When the Case Supervisor sends a pc already in the HGC to Review there is only ONE standard action:

Form 26 June 1965*Note: Today it’s a GF, see Tech Vol. VI, p. 52, VIII, p. 321 is done like an assessment, fast, no excessive Itsa.

Form 26 June 1965*Note: Today it’s a GF, see Tech Vol. VI, p. 52, VIII, p. 321 is done like an assessment, fast, no excessive Itsa.

Further, it's done NOW. The Case Supervisor wants it right away. NEVER have a "backlog" of Reviews on Case Supervisor request for Review.

Further, it's done NOW. The Case Supervisor wants it right away. NEVER have a "backlog" of Reviews on Case Supervisor request for Review.

Pc comes in, gets the Form done BANG. Right now. Takes 10-15 minutes. No more than that.

Pc comes in, gets the Form done BANG. Right now. Takes 10-15 minutes. No more than that.

One puts down under recommendations what has been found on the assessment. "Pick up Cleaned Cleans" or "Auditor's Comm Cycle out, do ARC Break List 1 Auditing by List". Whatever you found you recommend it be done. Former Release gave a big read and BD. All right, put "Do Former Release Rehab" as the recommendation.

One puts down under recommendations what has been found on the assessment. "Pick up Cleaned Cleans" or "Auditor's Comm Cycle out, do ARC Break List 1 Auditing by List". Whatever you found you recommend it be done. Former Release gave a big read and BD. All right, put "Do Former Release Rehab" as the recommendation.

When the Case Supervisor asks for a Review of the case one ONLY does the form and does it only as an assessment. One does not handle any part of that form on a Case Supervisor request. And one does it straightaway. A Review "Backlog" is a disgrace. One day wait is too many. It's done at once. Why? Because it only takes a few minutes.

When the Case Supervisor asks for a Review of the case one ONLY does the form and does it only as an assessment. One does not handle any part of that form on a Case Supervisor request. And one does it straightaway. A Review "Backlog" is a disgrace. One day wait is too many. It's done at once. Why? Because it only takes a few minutes.

Do the form, send the pc to the Examiner and the Examiner returns the pc at once to the HGC or at once sends to Ethics if a Roller Coaster is found or no case change.

Do the form, send the pc to the Examiner and the Examiner returns the pc at once to the HGC or at once sends to Ethics if a Roller Coaster is found or no case change.

Honest, it's too easy.

Honest, it's too easy.

If it takes anyone longer than that then it's because an assessment isn't being done. The form is being used for auditing! When all that's needed is an assessment.

If it takes anyone longer than that then it's because an assessment isn't being done. The form is being used for auditing! When all that's needed is an assessment.

When a pc is to be handled or finished off by Review, we now have a different matter.

When a pc is to be handled or finished off by Review, we now have a different matter.

The Review Auditor sees "Review to handle" on the slip or "Review to complete case".

The Review Auditor sees "Review to handle" on the slip or "Review to complete case".

This is his signal to do Form 26 June 1965 AS AN AUDITING ACTION.

This is his signal to do Form 26 June 1965 AS AN AUDITING ACTION.

Same form, different use. One now doesn't assess with the Form. One Audits with the Form.

Same form, different use. One now doesn't assess with the Form. One Audits with the Form.

This means one cleans it all up, section by section as one goes along.

This means one cleans it all up, section by section as one goes along.

ARC Break reads. Find out if it's a session ARC Break or a process ARC Break, and do the appropriate list, find it (or them) and indicate the By-Passed Charge (don't audit it by list).

ARC Break reads. Find out if it's a session ARC Break or a process ARC Break, and do the appropriate list, find it (or them) and indicate the By-Passed Charge (don't audit it by list).

If it's an environment ARC Break adapt List 1 to the environment. Locate and indicate the By-Passed Charge.

If it's an environment ARC Break adapt List 1 to the environment. Locate and indicate the By-Passed Charge.

DON'T go on with ARC Break reading when Review is handling the pc. Clean it up.

DON'T go on with ARC Break reading when Review is handling the pc. Clean it up.

Clean everything else up.

Clean everything else up.

Polish up the entire Form 26 June 65 and leave it all beaming.

Polish up the entire Form 26 June 65 and leave it all beaming.

Now do what's indicated with the case such as Former Release Rehab or flatten unflat processes.

Now do what's indicated with the case such as Former Release Rehab or flatten unflat processes.

If the case turns out on the Form to be an Ethics type, have the Examiner send to Ethics and don't do anything else after finding the pc is an Ethics type. No Case Gain in the past = SP. Roller Coaster = PTS. Leave it to Ethics to find out why. When (and if) the pc gets a clean "bill of health" from Ethics (has disconnected or whatever) Review can get the pc back again and finish up the incomplete actions outlined in this section.

If the case turns out on the Form to be an Ethics type, have the Examiner send to Ethics and don't do anything else after finding the pc is an Ethics type. No Case Gain in the past = SP. Roller Coaster = PTS. Leave it to Ethics to find out why. When (and if) the pc gets a clean "bill of health" from Ethics (has disconnected or whatever) Review can get the pc back again and finish up the incomplete actions outlined in this section.

In short, in "Review to handle" one handles the whole case and finishes it off.

In short, in "Review to handle" one handles the whole case and finishes it off.

The same form (Form 26 June 1965) can be used in two different ways: as an assessment and as an auditing list of things to handle.

The same form (Form 26 June 1965) can be used in two different ways: as an assessment and as an auditing list of things to handle.

On a student assist the Review Auditor uses Form 26 June 65 as an assessment form and handles what is found on the form. The Review Auditor does not fail to do the form and also does not fail to handle what was found during assessment after it is done. Note, one assesses, then handles what was found. He doesn't audit the whole form. And also Review doesn't complete the case as a case. It's just an assist.

On a student assist the Review Auditor uses Form 26 June 65 as an assessment form and handles what is found on the form. The Review Auditor does not fail to do the form and also does not fail to handle what was found during assessment after it is done. Note, one assesses, then handles what was found. He doesn't audit the whole form. And also Review doesn't complete the case as a case. It's just an assist.

Public assists are done the same way in Review.

Public assists are done the same way in Review.

When the Examiner does not declare a pc and does not send the pc to Certs and Awards, he sends the pc to Review. (He can also, instead, send the pc to Ethics.)

When the Examiner does not declare a pc and does not send the pc to Certs and Awards, he sends the pc to Review. (He can also, instead, send the pc to Ethics.)

When the Examiner sends a Declare? to Review, instead of Declaring, the Review Auditor does Form 26 June 65 as an assessment, locates the trouble and after the assessment is done handles what was found or indicates it's an Ethics matter.

When the Examiner sends a Declare? to Review, instead of Declaring, the Review Auditor does Form 26 June 65 as an assessment, locates the trouble and after the assessment is done handles what was found or indicates it's an Ethics matter.

In either case (audits or sends to Ethics) the Review Auditor hands the pc back to the Examiner. The Examiner may now send the pc to Certs and Awards to get the Release award, or to Ethics to handle the indicated Ethics matter (usually PTS situation).

In either case (audits or sends to Ethics) the Review Auditor hands the pc back to the Examiner. The Examiner may now send the pc to Certs and Awards to get the Release award, or to Ethics to handle the indicated Ethics matter (usually PTS situation).

But the Examiner must not send the pc back to the HGC after the Case Supervisor has said Declare? (except when the Declare? is for an earlier stage than the pc is being audited for). If anything else has to be done, Review does it.

But the Examiner must not send the pc back to the HGC after the Case Supervisor has said Declare? (except when the Declare? is for an earlier stage than the pc is being audited for). If anything else has to be done, Review does it.

You see Qual Div handles the flat ball bearings that didn't roll on the assembly line of the HGC. Qual is wholly in the flat ball bearing business. The HGC and Academy are wholly in the assembly line business, dealing in fairly round ball bearings.

You see Qual Div handles the flat ball bearings that didn't roll on the assembly line of the HGC. Qual is wholly in the flat ball bearing business. The HGC and Academy are wholly in the assembly line business, dealing in fairly round ball bearings.

So when the HGC or Academy has said that's it (either, "We can't handle" or "Declare?" or "Graduate") it's now up to Qual. If the pc or student is not a Release or not well skilled or the pc doesn't think he or she is a Release or the student feels he can't make it, then it's all up to Review.

So when the HGC or Academy has said that's it (either, "We can't handle" or "Declare?" or "Graduate") it's now up to Qual. If the pc or student is not a Release or not well skilled or the pc doesn't think he or she is a Release or the student feels he can't make it, then it's all up to Review.

Qual's tools for the student are the Assist and Cramming Section and for the pc are:

Qual's tools for the student are the Assist and Cramming Section and for the pc are:

1. 26 June 65 Form.

1. 26 June 65 Form.

2. Any standard process or auditing action.

2. Any standard process or auditing action.

3. HCO B 30 June 65 and any other Former Release Rehabilitation HCO B.

3. HCO B 30 June 65 and any other Former Release Rehabilitation HCO B.

The HGC also uses these same tools. The Case Supervisor commonly orders one of his or her auditors to do 26 June 1965 Form.

The HGC also uses these same tools. The Case Supervisor commonly orders one of his or her auditors to do 26 June 1965 Form.

On Power Processing and Former Release Rehab, an HGC Intensive on a pc always starts with:

On Power Processing and Former Release Rehab, an HGC Intensive on a pc always starts with:

1. The old pc assessment form from Dianetic days (if not already done and in hand on the pc).

1. The old pc assessment form from Dianetic days (if not already done and in hand on the pc).

2. 26 June 65 Form (if the pc has ever been audited before).

2. 26 June 65 Form (if the pc has ever been audited before).

It cuts down the clutter and keeps auditors calmer and makes assignment easier when the HGC uses the Qual tools routinely and only squawks when baffled. Qual takes over on a pc if the HGC has really goofed or has mis-Declared?

It cuts down the clutter and keeps auditors calmer and makes assignment easier when the HGC uses the Qual tools routinely and only squawks when baffled. Qual takes over on a pc if the HGC has really goofed or has mis-Declared?

The HGC assembly line considers all pcs a bit dented and runs an assembly line on the basis of "some dents in ball bearings must be handled in the HGC". When the ball bearing just won't roll at all in the HGC, the Case Supervisor throws in the chips and says, "To Review to Handle". If the Case Supervisor wants a check on his auditor, he says, "To Review for check. " And the HGC gets the pc back.

The HGC assembly line considers all pcs a bit dented and runs an assembly line on the basis of "some dents in ball bearings must be handled in the HGC". When the ball bearing just won't roll at all in the HGC, the Case Supervisor throws in the chips and says, "To Review to Handle". If the Case Supervisor wants a check on his auditor, he says, "To Review for check. " And the HGC gets the pc back.

Students and public wanting assists are sent straight to Review by the Registrar, by-passing the HGC as this is bit and piece auditing.

Students and public wanting assists are sent straight to Review by the Registrar, by-passing the HGC as this is bit and piece auditing.

Qual (and the HGC) are not exempt from handling the Eight Big Rules of auditing:

Qual (and the HGC) are not exempt from handling the Eight Big Rules of auditing:

1. A pc must never be audited while ARC Broken. (Assessment of a list is not auditing unless one is Auditing by List meaning cleaning up each line, not looking for the thing on the List.)

1. A pc must never be audited while ARC Broken. (Assessment of a list is not auditing unless one is Auditing by List meaning cleaning up each line, not looking for the thing on the List.)

2. A pc will make no case progress while suffering from a Present Time Problem which fixes his attention on the environment.

2. A pc will make no case progress while suffering from a Present Time Problem which fixes his attention on the environment.

3. A pc with withholds will be critical, natter or blow and is out of comm.

3. A pc with withholds will be critical, natter or blow and is out of comm.

4. A pc will worsen after auditing if connected to a Suppressive Person (and only worsens when so connected).

4. A pc will worsen after auditing if connected to a Suppressive Person (and only worsens when so connected).

5. A pc who makes no case gains is Suppressive (and can only be handled by Power Processes and a Class VII Auditor).

5. A pc who makes no case gains is Suppressive (and can only be handled by Power Processes and a Class VII Auditor).

6. Auditing a pc past a state of Release on the processes of that stage can make the pc's tone arm rise and bar further case gain even at upper stages of Release. (If you don't rehabilitate at least in part a 1st Stage Release that was overrun, you won't get results at the 2nd Stage or any higher stage. If you don't rehab an overrun on 2nd Stage you won't get results on Third Stage, etc. Also, a pc who went 1st Stage on R6EW won't run on 2nd Stage until the 1st Stage is found. In some cases the pc won't now run on 2nd Stage if he went 4th Stage, by-passing the lot. In short you can't by-pass free needles.)

6. Auditing a pc past a state of Release on the processes of that stage can make the pc's tone arm rise and bar further case gain even at upper stages of Release. (If you don't rehabilitate at least in part a 1st Stage Release that was overrun, you won't get results at the 2nd Stage or any higher stage. If you don't rehab an overrun on 2nd Stage you won't get results on Third Stage, etc. Also, a pc who went 1st Stage on R6EW won't run on 2nd Stage until the 1st Stage is found. In some cases the pc won't now run on 2nd Stage if he went 4th Stage, by-passing the lot. In short you can't by-pass free needles.)

7. A pc whose needle doesn't react to the auditor even at TA 2 or 3 may be ARC Broken, not Released.

7. A pc whose needle doesn't react to the auditor even at TA 2 or 3 may be ARC Broken, not Released.

8. An auditor's fractured Comm Cycle, unseen additives, lack of skill on a meter, attitude or false report can make a standard process not seem to work, and only these may make one work toward unusual solutions and get unreal about standard tech.

8. An auditor's fractured Comm Cycle, unseen additives, lack of skill on a meter, attitude or false report can make a standard process not seem to work, and only these may make one work toward unusual solutions and get unreal about standard tech.

There are other rules. They are important but not as important as each of the EIGHT BIG RULES.

There are other rules. They are important but not as important as each of the EIGHT BIG RULES.

Therefore, the only unusual solution you ever have to take in auditing is to straighten up one of the Eight Big Rules when it's out on the pc. It is rare but can happen. Example: Pc's ARC Break is too bad to get a read on any of the lower lines of Form 26 June 65. Obviously, then, to assess Form 26 June 65 at all on a few cases you have to locate and indicate the By-Passed Charge.

Therefore, the only unusual solution you ever have to take in auditing is to straighten up one of the Eight Big Rules when it's out on the pc. It is rare but can happen. Example: Pc's ARC Break is too bad to get a read on any of the lower lines of Form 26 June 65. Obviously, then, to assess Form 26 June 65 at all on a few cases you have to locate and indicate the By-Passed Charge.

In checking a free needle, finding it doesn't respond at all, one has to know by looking at the pc whether the pc is Keyed Out or ARC Broken. The only other bug here is "Dead Thetan" wherein the old "Stage 4" needle so called has never responded to anyone (this is obvious as the pc never got any TA in auditing either).

In checking a free needle, finding it doesn't respond at all, one has to know by looking at the pc whether the pc is Keyed Out or ARC Broken. The only other bug here is "Dead Thetan" wherein the old "Stage 4" needle so called has never responded to anyone (this is obvious as the pc never got any TA in auditing either).

A pc can have such a withhold that he just chops the auditor or the course or the org. It's always a withhold that makes him chop or blow. Don't be reasonable about it – it's a technical fact.

A pc can have such a withhold that he just chops the auditor or the course or the org. It's always a withhold that makes him chop or blow. Don't be reasonable about it – it's a technical fact.

If an auditor really knows his Eight Big Rules, he can work then very easily with a form and know what he is looking at. The eight are on Form 26 June 65, too, you know. Only Rule 7 may prevent a straightforward assessment, as the ARC Break may have to be handled before one can get on down the list with reads.

If an auditor really knows his Eight Big Rules, he can work then very easily with a form and know what he is looking at. The eight are on Form 26 June 65, too, you know. Only Rule 7 may prevent a straightforward assessment, as the ARC Break may have to be handled before one can get on down the list with reads.

The common mistake of Review is to mistake a PTP or Withhold for an ARC Break.

The common mistake of Review is to mistake a PTP or Withhold for an ARC Break.

This is easy to do. Supervisors are prone to say "Pc ARC Broken" when a pc looks nattery or gloomy.

This is easy to do. Supervisors are prone to say "Pc ARC Broken" when a pc looks nattery or gloomy.

Review, although it takes no instructions on tech from Tech, can get mixed up on this too, prompted by the Supervisor's error or the pc's own statement. SPs commonly start a Review session with "I'm ARC Broken…" when, fact is, the SP has a big withhold or PTP.

Review, although it takes no instructions on tech from Tech, can get mixed up on this too, prompted by the Supervisor's error or the pc's own statement. SPs commonly start a Review session with "I'm ARC Broken…" when, fact is, the SP has a big withhold or PTP.

When a Review Auditor or an Examiner finds a tech mess like alter-is or the fractured comm cycle of an HGC auditor, they MUST report it to Qual Sec who MUST send in an Ethics chit on it. The chit is written by the Examiner or the Review Auditor and sent to Qual Sec for forwarding to Ethics.

When a Review Auditor or an Examiner finds a tech mess like alter-is or the fractured comm cycle of an HGC auditor, they MUST report it to Qual Sec who MUST send in an Ethics chit on it. The chit is written by the Examiner or the Review Auditor and sent to Qual Sec for forwarding to Ethics.

ONLY in this way will Examiners or Review ever hold onto their own activities. If they don't chit gross auditing errors found in pcs or in auditing instructions then their whole larger purpose is defeated. Qual is the technical cop. Handle flat ball bearings, yes. But also proof up the Tech Division against having so many by reporting its goofs.

ONLY in this way will Examiners or Review ever hold onto their own activities. If they don't chit gross auditing errors found in pcs or in auditing instructions then their whole larger purpose is defeated. Qual is the technical cop. Handle flat ball bearings, yes. But also proof up the Tech Division against having so many by reporting its goofs.

This applies to any student received also. Qual, getting a student or pc who has then to be sent to Ethics MUST chit to Ethics whoever overlooked it in Tech. When Qual finds a student who is SP or PTS who has been on course a while, Qual must chit the student's Course Supervisor for a big goof in having the student on course at all. Similarly, Qual chits an auditor whose pc, sent to Review, turns out to be PTS or SP. The Academy or HGC must have gone stupid to be auditing or training such a student or pc. For they bring total chaos to the assembly line. Supervisors and auditors who don't send pcs who are PTS or SP to Ethics deserve Psychiatric Awards. For they are wrecking the org by continuing to train or process such a person. So that's Qual's hat, too.

This applies to any student received also. Qual, getting a student or pc who has then to be sent to Ethics MUST chit to Ethics whoever overlooked it in Tech. When Qual finds a student who is SP or PTS who has been on course a while, Qual must chit the student's Course Supervisor for a big goof in having the student on course at all. Similarly, Qual chits an auditor whose pc, sent to Review, turns out to be PTS or SP. The Academy or HGC must have gone stupid to be auditing or training such a student or pc. For they bring total chaos to the assembly line. Supervisors and auditors who don't send pcs who are PTS or SP to Ethics deserve Psychiatric Awards. For they are wrecking the org by continuing to train or process such a person. So that's Qual's hat, too.

When Ethics won't handle a Roller Coaster or an SP and pushes the being back into the Org Qual must cable or despatch the Office of LRH Saint Hill. We have the tech on PTS and SP. We mustn't train or audit them until the condition is handled properly in Ethics (and even then we train and process them with a cynical squint in the left eye, alert for further messes from them.)

When Ethics won't handle a Roller Coaster or an SP and pushes the being back into the Org Qual must cable or despatch the Office of LRH Saint Hill. We have the tech on PTS and SP. We mustn't train or audit them until the condition is handled properly in Ethics (and even then we train and process them with a cynical squint in the left eye, alert for further messes from them.)

The technical activities of Qual are all standard, all laid out neatly. There are no unusual solutions if one does the usual as above.

The technical activities of Qual are all standard, all laid out neatly. There are no unusual solutions if one does the usual as above.

No need to get in a panic about a case. Do the usual. If THAT doesn't work, it was done in an unusual way, wasn't it?

No need to get in a panic about a case. Do the usual. If THAT doesn't work, it was done in an unusual way, wasn't it?

Qual can win all the way.

Qual can win all the way.

Just do the usual Qual actions on the standard Qual internal routing lines, and UP go tech standards and results.

Just do the usual Qual actions on the standard Qual internal routing lines, and UP go tech standards and results.

And that's what we want, don't we?

And that's what we want, don't we?

[This HCO B has been corrected per HCO B 21 September 1965, Qualifications Technical Actions, the full text of which said to alter the last word in the second sentence, paragraph 3, under section entitled “Reports”, from “Qual” to “Tech”.]

[This HCO B has been corrected per HCO B 21 September 1965, Qualifications Technical Actions, the full text of which said to alter the last word in the second sentence, paragraph 3, under section entitled “Reports”, from “Qual” to “Tech”.]