A number years ago, an enterprising individual took it upon himself to compile the entirety of the Upper Level materials (mainly confidential ones) that were available to him.

Those two volumes were prepared in PDF format and made to look just like the original Technical Volumes issued in 1976

Immediately, the bulk of the Independent field took the compilation as complete, entirely authentic and accurate, three things it simply was not. It seems that acknowledging the fact that some materials were incomplete would have run afoul of a number or practitioners vested interests, especially financial ones. As a result, a number of auditors have been running boot-leg rundowns or rundowns that are attributed to LRH but are in fact the entire creation of Independent auditors of questionable competence.

I have denounced the inaccuracies within those two volumes, to little avail in the past.

Here is an exact summary based on facts by someone who has had access to the entirety of the materials covered in  those volumes:



Whereas all materials but one issue is complete and authentic, the materials are not complete. The way the materials are presented has led a number of auditors to assume very incorrectly that any Class IV, including those who have not even interned would be competent enough to audit those processes. This is definitely not the case. It requires the highest skill to run those processes competently. Particularly notable in their omission, are the materials that explain the actual auditing style and why running Power processing on Clears is destructive to their case and why it is suppressive to do so.


The checksheet is missing, but 80% of required materials are present, all of them bona fide. Missing are 5 C/S only or confidential HCOBs that are crucial for proper guidance on the level.


The entirety of the Clearing Course written materials is presented minus the checksheet.

Missing are all of the Clearing Course Films.  Also three HCOBs that are only found on the SOLO C/S course (and the AO Review Auditor course) that deal with the state of Clear and are crucial in determining the mechanics of Clearing and on what type of auditing it is possible (or impossible) to achieve Clearing. Failure to apply those principles has led to numerous false attests to the state of Clear from pcs on lower levels in the In dependent field, where the Auditor-C/S was simply not qualified to make the adjudication.  The self-appointed Freezone PR has been fanatically active falsely validating those attestations, and chastised me for “speaking against Upstats” even after I showed him evidence that those “Upstats” were in fact very much Downstats and in lower conditions as far as the Tech is concerned. I hope that those who read my comment decide to enlist competent help before blindly attesting people to Clear with no independent test and without someone who is fully trained to validate Clear. A particular organization that specializes in false Clear attest at lower levels decided to direct people on OT II to run the Clearing Course Materials at the same time, “because the pc is very much interested in running those” If those who perpetuate that out-tech had only bothered to train properly they would have realized that the reason for such interest was that the fact that these individuals had never archived the state of Clear in the first place!

Some ignorant individuals have renamed their own copies of the 1958 Clearing Congress Films held in Washington DC as “Clearing Course Films”

For the record: there are 6 Clearing Course films (5 technical briefings, one demo session)

The Bank and its pattern (1964)

The Materials of the R6 Bank (1965)

Composition of the Bank (1966)

The Technical Materials (1966)
General Information (1966)
Auditing Demonstration  (1966)



Complete and authentic materials of all past and present version of OT I



Complete and authentic materials. One page from the platens is omitted, most likely the result of an error. The text version of Volume 14 has the missing page.


Complete and authentic materials as far as the student OT III course pack goes.

5 OT III C/S and Remedy/Review HCOBs are missing. These HCOBs are crucial for programming certain types of remedy. Only auditors who have audited OT III reviews at an AO or Flag or trained on the Solo C/S course are likely to have ever read those bulletins.


Each of those levels is in some way altered from the version written by LRH.

The original materials of these levels were entirely written in LRH hand. The materials presented in Volume 14 are typed materials.

OT IV has some crucial Processes/Drills omitted from it. The C/S instruction on C/Sing the level are entirely missing. The first step of OT IV is an audited rundown audited by a Class VIII. Misguided Freezone C/Ses with the Quickie impulse are known to instruct people to do that step Solo, even though it is clearly a Review Action and has a secret purpose not revealed to the pc but known by the C/S.

OT VII is entirely different than the version written by LRH. It turns out to be the “EDUCTIVISM” version. Eductivism was Jack Horner (pronounced squirrel by LRH and persecuted for it) own take and version of Scientology in the 1960s and 1970s. Jack Horner believed in the vital importance of running Creative Processing. LRH ordered Creative Processing abandoned during the 1950s, after observing that it tended to beef up the bank in a number of cases.

Anyone reading that version of OT VII will instantly notice that it contains many Creative processing processes and therefore an immediate giveaway that it cannot be authentic.

The true version of OT VII start with an assessment before any process is run.

And last but not least, the End Phenomenon of OT VII is not mentioned, making one wonders if all those who trumpet completing people on OT VII are truly giving their pcs what they had been promised ,if neither they nor the pc truly know the EP.


Mainly Complete. Authentic materials. A few of the NOTs series are missing.

There are a total of 55 NOTs series Bulletins plus a number of additions and attachments.

NOTE: NOTs 53 is missing. It was a useful bulletin called ERRORS ON NOTs, which gave useful and realistic examples on how NOTs cases could be debugged. Because it was written by David Mayo, in 1982 all copies were ordered to be pulled out of packs and anywhere else and turned over to RTC. Everyone having access to that bulletin was sec-checked to ensure no copy had survived.

NOTS 56 is a forgery. I am told that a “FREEZONE AUTHORITY” had certified it as authentic.

All one has to do is use to google to discover it was a parody written by Keith Henson.


No checksheet exist.  most of the Solo NOTS only materials are missing. For a full rundown on what the full Solo NOTs materials consist of, please read my essay on the Synopsis of Solo NOTs


The lone HCOB in that section is authentic. It is the only HCOB ever issued that has OT VIII in either the title or the distribution.

Paradoxically that HCOB has never been part of OT VIII as delivered on the Freewinds or by the Church.


This is one of the three versions of OT VIII released by the Church. It was released after the fiasco of the first version of OT VIII on the Maiden Voyage. Out of 300 people who did that version of OT VIII, more than 40 had dropped dead within 3 months. This was a tightly kept secret. Since i was working in the OT VIII Eligibility HGC at the time, I became privy to all sort of information on the matter.

In late 1988, the following Tech terminals were secretly RPFed:

Ray Mithoff, actual author of the Freewinds OT VIII with some assistance from LRH handwritten notes. As is the case with all Scientology compilations since 1985, David Miscavige had absolute veto power over it and approved its release.

The entire Freewind (FSSO) OT VIII delivery team except for one course Supervisor, the OT VIII review Auditor and the Tech page. It specifically included Margaret Supak (Senior C/S FSSO) and the late Laura Wolfe (OT VIII C/S)

At the FSO the following two C/Ses were RPFed for having an unusually high proportion of the dead among people they had C/sed: Ruthe Humprey and Dan McNicholl.

A number of year ago, Ariane Jackson, a former friend and pc of mine became livid when she discovered how abused and ripped off her ex-husband had been by the Church and had literally died of a broken Heart with Scientology.  (His diary has been published on the Internet under the title: Diary of a Dying Scientologist).She decided to punish the Church by telling all  she knew about OT VIII on the Internet.

I immediately emailed Ariane and we had a series of pleasant communications. The next day she wrote me, informing me that there were 8 lawyers representing the Church in her living room. Ariane was never heard of again. It requires no great ability to speculate what happened next: the two million dollars in loans arranged by the Church that her ex-husband had made to dead-beats, being reimbursed to her and their child, plus hush money and a gag order..


Grossly inaccurate and incomplete materials.

It includes the Class X course checksheet. For some reason all of the auditors who claim to deliver L-10 in the independent field make nothing of the fact that there are 24 theory bulletins on the Checksheet that are not available in any form nor even an abridged summary. Those bulletins explains the procedures, the auditing style and general prerequisites and core theory of the rundown.

Most of the process sheets in that section are as Warren McShane had testified in court “unartful and severely incomplete reconstructions”.

I have repeatedly stated that one of the missing bulletins states that you can seriously deteriorate a case or even kill him by misrunning L-10. This has been always glossed over by those who have a financial interest in delivering rundowns they are not qualified for, since most of these pseudo-auditors instantly wash their hands of any overt product they make, much like a cheap mechanic who refuse to honor any warranty on his repairs as long as the car has been driven out of his lot.


This pathetic reconstruction fails to explain the theory behind the rundown nor how it is achieved. Some of the steps are even given in the wrong sequence.


Very poor reconstruction with none of the theory behind L12 explained in any way. Several of the techniques used on L-12 are only described in an LRH briefing. Neither the tape, nor a transcript, or even notes or summary of it are known to exist outside of the Church

Anyone who delivers that rundown under those conditions is deeply out-ethics and can have only financial motives for delivering a rundown that can easily deteriorate a case (and in some celebrated cases in the Independent field) make them act like ranting lunatics.


Quickiest of the quickies is the only way to describe this laughable write-up by Russ Meadows who was declared Suppressive in 1976 under orders by LRH. The 1976 HCOB “Auditing reports, Falsifying of” summarize Russ’s career. His write up omits almost everything of importance, starting with the fact that the New Vitality Rundown is a Dianetics Rundown. This has led a Squirrel in the US Midwest to market that “LRH Rundown” while he delivers processes of his own manufacture instead. Having failed to produce the expected result of a Valence shift, the pseudo-auditor then runs NOTs commands and procedures on lower level pcs. When I privately chastised the auditor for both Fraud (selling an out-tech Rundown of his own manufacture while claiming it is LRH) and squirreling (auditing NOTs procedures on lower level cases), his reaction was extremely violent. He wrote a Suppressive Person Declare on me and distributed it to his “Friends”. He then added the heinous fabrication that I wished his wife dead. I did not even know he was married and to this day I do not even know the name of that woman nor anything about her. I never wish people dead. It is against my basic philosophy. I want criminals to stop being out-ethics and I wish liars to stop lying because according to my fundamental belief, anyone can redeem himself. Only someone cruel wish to see people dead.



These bulletins are authentic. They were released in 1978 but soon after were withdrawn stating that their use was restricted to SuperPower only.



The version of SuperPower is a pure work of fantasy from the Freezone.

The correct SuperPower Rundown as originally conceived by LRH consist of the following 12 steps:

C/S 53 (as included in the Tech Volumes)

Ethics repair list (the original list issued in 1978 is NOT the same as the one in Volume 14.The Ethics Repair List in Volume 14 was written by a person with a long history of out 2D and alcoholism)

Personal revival rundown (not released /known in the Independent field)

Consequences rundown  (not released/known in the Independent field)

Bright think rundown (as described above)

Study green form (in the New Tech Volumes)

False data rundown parts I and II  (not released/known in the Independent field)

Cause rundown  (not released nor known in the Independent field)

Power of choice rundown  (not released nor known in the Independent field)

 Perception rundown  (not released nor known in the Independent field)

 Learning drills  (not released nor known in the Independent field)

Physical universe drills  (not released nor known in the Independent field)

The original purpose of SuperPower was to resolve all the ills that make staff members poor workers or ineffective.



1- A ludicrous statement is made about there being a “condition of No Condition” Obviously the one who designed that step failed to word Clear the word Condition, which means state of being. One cannot avoid being in some form of state of being, even postulating oneself in the lowest possible levels of unconsciousness or non-existence causes someone to still be in some type of state of being or condition.  It is followed by the command to “Find a Viewpoint”. If the author of that process had understood the axioms well, he would have written “Assume a Viewpoint” instead.

2- The next step directs the person to violate all known references on exterior and ending sessions, plus those on persistent F/N. It then introduces the false datum that one can audit over a big win and over a persistent F/N. The author appears to never have read the definition of a persistent F/N: it persists, therefore by definition you could no longer get reads without having killed it first, yet the authors insinuate that only a Floating TA cause an F/N to be truly persistent.

3-This is followed by a Creative Processing Process. Owing to their having been abandoned by LRH long ago, it is proof by itself that the process cannot be genuine.

4- A seriously altered version of the Ethics Repair list with a number of important questions omitted.

5- The next step is another Creative Processing Action

6- The last set of process shows its author confusion on flows, some of the commands have Flow one reversed with Flow 2 or have flow 3 omitted.

The last Creative Processes in this rundown are a form of Validation Processing. Long experience with that kind of process has shown that they have built in instability within them and that the key-outs created by that type of process not only do not last long, but frequently result in an eventual very strong key-in days or months later. At least one case in the Independent field that had been doing well before the rundown was started committed suicide shortly after completing it.

Therefore consider as out-ethics any auditor still running this rundown once they have been appraised of the data above.

Obviously those whose overts are restimulated by my analysis above will probably attack me.

It is my hope that others, which form the majority, will benefit greatly from my statements and be able to make better and effective progress toward improvement and a better state of well-being.

Pierre Ethier

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s