icy in the form of Change 1 to AR 66-21 in
October 1965). See also Memo, DASD (CR) for DASD
(H&M) et al., 19 Feb 64, sub: Racial Designations
on Department of Defense Forms; idem for Lee C.
White, 9 Jul 64. All in ASD (M) files. See also
Washington _Evening Star_, June 22, 1964, p. A2.]

[Footnote 22-64: Memo, Philip M. Timpane for DASD
(CR), 10 Aug 64, sub: Race on Records, ASD (M)
291.2.]

[Footnote 22-65: Memo, Dep Under SA for DASD (CR), 3
Jun 64, sub: Proposed DOD Instruction Re: Use of
Racial Designations in Forms and Records and Annual
Racial Distribution Report, copy in CMH.]

These proposals marked a high point in the effort to simplify and (p. 577)
reduce the use of racial designations by the Department of Defense.
Although several versions of Fitt's 1964 draft order were discussed in
later years, none was ever published.[22-66] Nor did the Bureau of the
Budget, to which the matter was referred for the development of a
government-wide policy, publish any instructions. In fact, by the
mid-1960's an obvious trend had begun in the Department of Defense
toward broader use of racial indicators but narrower definition of
race.

[Footnote 22-66: L. Howard Bennett, Untitled Minutes
of Equal Opportunity Council Meetings on the
Subject of Racial Indicators, 30 Sep 66; Memo,
Bennett for Thomas Morris and Jack Moskowitz, 8 Dec
66, sub: Actions to Aid in Assuring Equality of
Opportunity During Ratings, Assignment, Selection,
and Promotion Processes, copies of both in CMH.
Judge Bennett was the executive secretary of the
Equal Opportunity Council within the Office of the
Secretary of Defense, an interdepartmental working
group dealing with racial indicators in September
1966 and consisting of two members from each
manpower office of the services and P. M. Timpane
of the DASD (Equal Opportunity) office.]

Several changes in American society were responsible for the changes.
The need for more exact racial documentation overcame the arg