Implementation of Army privatization directives at Forscom installations

{open_quotes}Privatization{close_quotes} has become the buzzword of the 1990s not only here in the United States but throughout the world. Privatization has been traditionally defined as the sale/transfer of state-owned (i.e. federal, state, county, city or public) assets to the private sector. Although there are numerous reasons for the privatization of state-owned assets, the primary reasons include the generation of a significant amount of cash to the state (Great Britain`s sale of electric power industry); capitalization of the formerly state-owned utility (sale of the utilities within many countries of the former Soviet Union); and state policy goals of eliminating monopolies, encouraging competition, and restructuring (Chile). Several year ago, the Department of Defense (DoD) and specifically the Department of Army (DoA) initiated its own `Privatization Process`. Coupled with shrinking budgets, workforce and funding resources from the Government, the Army was faced with antiquated utility infrastructure in need of significant upgrades and in some cases total replacements. Recognizing that the provision of utility services was not a core mission of the Army, DoA has encouraged its Installations throughout the country to consider the privatization of the Government-owned utility systems. In compliance with DoA policy, Forces Command (FORSCOM) has been at the forefront ofmore » the privatization process. To date, FORSCOM has initiated the process of analyzing the potential privatization of over 30 utility systems at 12 FORSCOM Installations located throughout the country. The FORSCOM Installations include Fort Irwin, CA; Fort Campbell, KY; Fort Bragg, NC; Fort McPherson, GA; Fort Hood, TX; Fort Polk, LA; Fort Lewis, WA; Fort Riley, KS; Fort Stewart, GA; Hunter Army Airfield, GA; Fort Carson, CO; Fort Devens, MA; Fort Dix, NJ; and Fort Gillem, GA.« less