1. The only answers permitted to a student’s demand for verbal technical data or unusual solutions are:

„The material is in (HCOB, Pol Letter or tape).“

„What does your material state?“

„What word did you miss in the (Bulletin, Pol Ltr or tape)?“ and (for requests for unusual auditing solutions)

„What did you actually do?“

Any other answer by Technical Secretaries, Ds of T, Instructors or course personnel is a misdemeanour.

2. Any instructor teaching or advising any method not contained in HCOBs or on tapes, or slighting existing HCOBs, Policy Letters or tapes may be charged with a crime.

3. Any Instructor in any way obscuring the source of technology by wrongly attributing it may be found guilty of a false report.

4. Any staff auditor who runs any process on any org pc that is not given in grade and level HCOBs may be charged by the Tech Sec or D of P with a misdemeanor.

5. Any alteration or non-standard rendition of a process is a misdemeanour.

6. Any staff auditor running a pc above the pc’s grade instead of for the next grade, or running processes out of sequence in a grade may be charged with a misdemeanour.

7. Any staff auditor reporting falsely verbally or in writing, on an auditor’s report may be charged with a crime.

8. Any staff auditor turning in an illegible report may be charged with a no report which is a misdemeanour.

9. Any staff auditor attesting falsely to TA or falsely reporting the flattening of a process may be charged with a misdemeanour.

10. Any staff auditor who receives orders to run an illegal process must report the matter at once to HCO Ethics or Saint Hill, requesting that the person so advising be charged with endangering the staff auditor’s job and repute.

11. Former regulations for students are abolished.

12. Students are covered as Scientologists by the HCO Ethics Codes and may request recourse from injustice and have the same privileges as any field Scientologist.

13. Tech Secs, Ds of T, Supervisors and Instructors as well as Qualifications Division personnel may request a Court of Ethics from the Department of Inspection and Reports for any student they find it necessary to discipline under the HCO Ethics Codes such discipline being in lieu of a Committee of Evidence. However the student may request a Committee of Evidence instead if he or she feels a wrong is being done.

14. Any student knowingly altering technology, applying processes improperly or using technology illegally on HGC pcs on lower unit students or the public while a student may be charged with a misdemeanour.

15. A student damaging another by willful application of incorrect technology may be charged by his Instructors with a Crime and a Court of Ethics action must be requested by his Instructors.

16. A student falsely enrolling may be charged by the org with a crime.

17. Blowing a course is handled under Suppressive Acts. If so charged the student may have recourse if applied for before 60 days to the Department of Inspection and Reports Ethics Section.

18. Preclears are covered by HCO Ethics Codes.

19. A preclear may have recourse when feeling unjustly wronged by applying to the Ethics Section of the Department of Inspection and Reports of the org.

20. A preclear refusing to answer an auditing question may be charged by the staff auditor with a „no report“ and taken before a Court of Ethics at once.

21. An HGC or staff preclear must report flagrant breaches of the Auditor’s Code to the Ethics Section of the Org, but if the report is false beyond reasonable doubt the preclear may be charged with a Suppressive Act.

22. A student preclear or HGC preclear blowing an org without reporting to the Tech Sec, D of P or the Ethics Section first and who will not permit any auditor to handle the matter at the org where the auditing occurred must be fully investigated at any cost by HCO in the pc’s own area. The auditing session must be fully investigated by the Ethics Section and if any Auditor’s Code breaks are found to have occurred in that auditing the auditor may be brought before a Court of Ethics. The entire matter and its final results must be reported to the Office of LRH at Saint Hill.

23. Charges against HGC or student preclears may also be made by the Tech Sec, the Qualifications Sec, Ds of T, Ds of P, Instructors and staff auditors.

24. Any person undergoing review is subject to the same actions as in the HGC or Academy and any personnel of the Qualifications Division may charge students and pcs under the Ethics Codes and bring them before a Court of Ethics.

25. Persons charged by Qualifications Division personnel may request recourse if wronged.

26. The Qualifications Division may request a Court of Ethics on Technical Division personnel, preclears and students for false reports, false attestations and no reports as well as other Ethics matters. And the Technical Division personnel may on their part request a Court of Ethics on Qualifications Division personnel, students or preclears.

This policy letter does not change any HCO Codes of Ethics but only augments them for the purposes of assisting peaceful and effective training and processing with the exact technology issued.