Based on data of the 1st Saint Hill ACC which I have now tabulated for what moved cases it is possible that the following processes should be tested on pc in the given order.

The Havingness Processes should bring needle down or up toward clear read for pc’s sex with a loosening needle.

The Confront process should move the tone arm at least 3 tones per hour of processing. The test should at least move arm and change needle pattern. While testing Confront processes run the Havingness process already found between tests until the needle is free and back at clear read.

In testing, first find the Havingness Process that suits the pc. If you can’t get one on the list to return the tone arm to clear read, use CCH 3 or 4 or both until Tone Arm is at clear read with a loose needle.

O/W also assists obtaining a clear read, so does a PTP run with O/W or an ARC break run with O/W. A PTP or an ARC break can stop or prevent a process from being found or from continuing to work when it has already worked before. Get off the PTP or the ARC break and the former workable Havingness will work again. If pc ARC breaks too easily to permit a cleanup with O/W, use Havingness XXXI (two objects) or CCH 3 or 4 or both. If pc still can’t be handled use CCH I and CCH 2, then get run what pc wouldn’t run.

A dozen commands is enough to show if a Havingness process is going to work or not. If the needle fails to free and the Tone Arm starts to go away from clear read, stop at once and bridge to next test process.

Only when the Havingness process is found should the Confront process needed be searched for.

When the two have been found, this is the pair which should be flattened. When they seem flat, combine them with a Help O/W process and run a regimen in this order:

The pc’s Havingness Process.

Help O/W on a terminal assessed or on a factor of Mest (Matter, energy, space, time, form or location as assessed per Regimen 6). (For Regimen 6 hear ACC tapes.)

The pc’s Havingness process. The pc’s Confront process. The pc’s Havingness process. The pc’s Help O/W process.

The pc’s Havingness process. Etc. Etc.

A Havingness process is always run to Tone Arm clear read with a freed needle. The Help process is run to a sticky needle and off Tone Arm. The Confront process is run to present time if possible.

Don’t run anything else on pc until you have found pc’s Havingness process or proved out what he says it was according to last auditor.

By definition:

A pc’s Havingness process is one that returns the Tone Arm to clear read and frees the needle.

A pc’s Help process is one that moves the Tone Arm at least 3 tones per hour and brings the reading always a bit closer to the clear read. (5 to 6, 5 to 6 on and on won’t do.)

A pc’s Confront process is defined in the same way as his Help process, except that it should move pc on the track, going further and further into the past and easier and easier into present time. Pc’s pictures should improve on a confront process.

Run all tests and processes in Model Session Form in HGCs now.

Here are the commands in possible order of likelihood they will locate the pc’s Havingness process and Confront process.

VII “Point out something.”

VI “Look around here and point out an effect you could prevent.”

XIX “What is the emotion of that (indicated object)?”

XI “Notice that (indicated object).” (No acknowledgement) “What aren’t you putting into it?”

XIII “Look around here and find something you could have.”

“Look around here and find something you could withhold.”

XXIV Outside Process. “What is the condition of that person?”

XXXI (Two small objects in auditor’s hands.) Exposes them alternately to pc, with as little motion of arms and hands as possible.

“Look at this.” (No acknowledgement) “What around here isn’t this duplicating?”

I “Where is the (room object)?” (Pc points.)

III “Look around here and find an object you are not in.”

XII “Look around here and find something you can agree with.”

XVI “Point out something around here that is like something else.”

XVII “Where isn’t that (indicated object)?”

XX “What is that (indicated object) not duplicating?”

XXI “What scene could that (indicated object) be part of?”

XXVI “What bad activity is that (indicated object) not part of?”

II “Look around here and find something you could have.”

VII “Tell me something I am not doing to you.”

X “What beingness could you confront?” “What beingness would you rather not confront?”

IV “What beingness could others not confront?”

XVI “What is something?” “What makes sense?”

XVII “What unkind thought have you withheld?”

XI “Tell me something you might not be confronting.”

VI “What would deter another?” “Where would you put it?”

III “What unconfrontable thing could you present?”

XXIV “What is a bad object?”

XXVI “How would you not duplicate a bad person?” “How would you not duplicate a bad thing?”

V “Point out a place where you are not being confronted.”

IX “Recall somebody who was real to you.” “Recall somebody you really liked.” “Recall somebody you could really communicate with.”

XIX “What intention failed?”

XXII “What would be a betrayal?”

XV “What would you rather not duplicate?”

I “What is understandable?” “What is understanding?”

III “What have you done?” “What have you withheld?”

XXI “What past beingness would best suit you?” “What past thing would best suit you?”

II “What could you confront?” “What would you rather not confront?”

The following Havingness Presession Process may be considered nul: XXII.

The following Confront processes may be considered nul: XX; XXIII; XXV.

None of the above four moved cases in the 1st Saint Hill ACC.