Defense Dept. Buying Assailed : Report Urges Major Changes in Procedures

A blue-ribbon commission gave President Reagan a sharply critical report Friday on the state of the nation’s massive defense establishment and recommended streamlined operations, less regulation and “major institutional change” in the Pentagon’s purchasing procedures.

Reagan, receiving the interim report of his Commission on Defense Management, promised to implement the recommendations as quickly as possible, “even if they run counter to the will of the entrenched bureaucracies and special interests.”

The commission, finding problems in every corner of the defense establishment, including the multibillion-dollar defense industry, the services and Congress, reported: “The spirit of cooperation needed to promote the common defense is today in jeopardy.”

Pentagon ‘Horror Stories’

The panel, chaired by David Packard, a former deputy secretary of defense, was appointed by Reagan last June in the wake of unfavorable publicity over such Pentagon procurement “horror stories” as a $7,622 coffee pot and a $640 toilet seat cover for military aircraft.

The commission, however, expanded its investigation well beyond problems in the acquisition system. It recommended giving the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff greater authority, creating a post of vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs, creating a post of undersecretary of defense for acquisition, drawing up two-year rather than one-year defense budgets, improving the precision of long-range planning and aggressively enforcing civil and criminal laws prohibiting fraud in defense procurement.

In 20 pages, the report offered an outline of the ills that plague the $300-billion-a-year effort to provide for the nation’s security. At the same time, however, Packard, in a letter to Reagan, praised “the substantial progress made in the last five years to improve the nation’s defense.”

“The morale and fighting ability of our armed forces are higher than at any time in recent memory,” he wrote. He singled out for praise the efforts of Caspar W. Weinberger, defense secretary since Reagan took office in 1981.

Report’s Conclusions

Tackling the broad scope of the nation’s defense operations, the report called for improved decision-making in the Administration and Congress, better organization of combat forces, strengthened and streamlined procurement procedures and “a more honest, productive partnership” between the Pentagon and the defense industry.

The document represents the results of a series of closed hearings at which the commission heard the views of senior Pentagon officials, military officers, members of Congress and internal Defense Department “whistle blowers” known for their sharp criticisms of departmental operations.

The report echoed some of the findings of previous studies, many of which have been either ignored or actively opposed by the Pentagon or key members of Congress.

But a Defense Department spokesman said that Weinberger had “no quarrel” with the report, although he does not support every “jot and tittle.” And Congress in recent weeks has moved toward approving legislation that would strengthen the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, currently Adm. William J. Crowe Jr.

‘Bold and Sweeping’

Sen. Sam Nunn of Georgia, the top-ranking Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, described the report as “a bold and sweeping and innovative series of proposals that will enhance very substantially our national security, if they are implemented.”

“The Packard Commission perhaps started out talking about toilet seats, but they ended up proposing to restructure the whole house,” Nunn told reporters. “I think it is a very strong step in the right direction.”

At a news conference, Packard, a founder and chairman of the Hewlett-Packard Co., the Palo Alto electronics firm, said:

“In the horror stories about spare parts costs and contractor cheating, you are talking about tens of millions of dollars. But better long-term planning and acquisition is a thousand times more important and could save tens of billions of dollars.”

The report complained that Congress and the executive branch lacked a “rational system” for reaching agreement on military strategy and budget policy. It criticized the “duplicative effort by numerous congressional committees and subcommittees.”

Provisional Budgets

The commission recommended that the President prepare provisional five-year budgets tied more closely than current five-year defense plans to economic realities. It said Congress should appropriate Pentagon funds on a two-year basis, rather than annually, to allow more efficient long-range planning.

At present, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff must offer the consensus view of the heads of all the military services when he advises the President. The commission would make the chairman the principal military adviser, who could present his own views to the President, regardless of those of the other service chiefs.

Need for Undersecretary

Arguing for the creation of an undersecretary of defense for acquisition, the report noted that there is no single senior official at the Pentagon “working full time to provide overall supervision” of military procurement.