HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 15 SEPTEMBER 19731
Ds of P
Reference HCO PL 15 Nov ’68 “Disconnection Cancelled”; HCO B 10 August ’73 “PTS Handling”, HCO PL 5 April ’72, “PTS Type A Handling”, HCO PL 7 May ’69 “Policies on Sources of Trouble”, and HCOB 24 Nov 65, “Search and Discovery”.)
“Handle or disconnect” is part of current procedure on handling Potential Trouble Sources, as per HCO B 10 August ’73, “PTS Handling”.
This does not mean that we are returning to the practice of publishing or writing disconnection letters to the person concerned.
Whether the PTS interview is done by the Ethics Officer, D of P, Auditor or Qual Personnel, the actual “handling” steps must be done under the jurisdiction of the Ethics Officer.
A large percentage of cases will completely resolve during the PTS interview itself or when the handling steps are actually done. The Ethics Officer must ensure that a written plan of handling does actually exist and that it is followed. All copies of correspondence, attested reports on personal interview handlings must be presented to the Ethics Officer as evidence of the handling. If the handling is being badly handled or not done, the Ethics Officer must get this corrected. If the handling, even under the jurisdiction of the Ethics Officer gets badly bugged, then he should request Qual Sec intervention and assistance.
One needs to understand the meaning of the word Disconnection in order to be able to apply it. Disconnection = to break or undo the connection of, separate, detach.
Disconnection has come to mean the actual action of writing to the person to inform him/her of the fact. This is a very extreme application of the word. A person can simply decide to disconnect and be disconnected from that moment on.
In some cases, the item found may be dead, and the person has no other choice but to disconnect. In that event, the person simply disconnects then and there, in the Ethics Officer’s office, or in session. No other action is required. Some may wish to write up a statement of such which is simply filed in his ethics file, with no other action taken. It is not mailed to anyone.
When handling disconnection, the word “disconnection” must be fully defined, so the person actually understands what he has to do.
Getting the above done will handle a large majority of cases.
Very occasionally, there will be a person who has a real live SP on their lines now. No amount of handling will be successful. In this event, the Ethics Officer must draw up a full CSW, with copies of all earlier correspondence and attested handlings and send to the A/G 2, with a proposed recommended method of handling the situation.
The public person or staff member being handled is NOT informed of what is contemplated until the above CSW3 is okayed by the A/G, and even then the A/G is not mentioned unless the A/G wishes it.
The A/G will naturally not permit any misemotional or accusative disconnection letters or actions to be done which could rebound on the Org.
The A/G will probably find that the earlier handling steps required by the 10 August 73 HCO B have not been properly applied or not done, and would write up instructions to get this done efficiently.
In only a few cases will open disconnection handling be required, and when this happens, it must be handled with the utmost care so that no repercussions occur.
HCO B 10 Aug ’73 “PTS Handling” is specifically written up for the handling of Potential Trouble Sources types 1 and 2 per HCO B 24 Nov ’65 “Search and Discovery” and Troublesome Source A of HCO PL 7 May ’69 “Policies on Sources of Trouble”, and does NOT cover the handling of other types of org troublesome sources, (B-J), who are handled per existing policy, and are not PTSes according to the technical definitions of PTS.
Ens. Judy Ziff, CS-5
Capt. Mary Sue Hubbard, CS-G
Authorized by AVU
BOARDS OF DIRECTORS
CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY
Copyright (c) 1973
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED