At present, these companies “hunt” either in South-Eastern Europe, or near the provincial capitals – such as the Upper Austrian Wasserdienstleistungs GmbH/WDL of which Linz AG holds 55 %, Energie AG OÖ 35 %, and Raiffeisen Landesbank 10 %.

Active since 2001, the company understands itself as a service provider to and from the end customer. Thus, the WDL offers services in water supply and wastewater treatment, as well as in the fields consulting projecting, operation management and financing, with every sector being of similar importance.

WDL CEO Christian Hasenleithner: “In the field of consulting in particular, but also in planning, where we understand ourselves as pure providers of know-how, we focus primarily on the region. The customer thus benefits by efficiency – and this is also what Minister Molterer intended. Whether these two services fall in the category Public Private Partnership/PPP is questionable.

If they do, then every service of a civil engineer would constitute a PPP model. In operation management, it depends whether a ‘full service’ is being agreed upon. Other individual performances such as the installation of a service connection, tank cleaning, or water analyses certainly do not rank among PPPs.”

According to Hasenleithner, it is also a matter of definition whether financing ranks among PPP. In charge of it is at any rate WDL Infrastruktur GmbH, a 100 percent subsidiary of WDL GmbH. Refinancing is guaranteed amongst others by Raiffeisen Landesbank.

"Struggle for Aspach"

How sparse and therefore much sought- after “partner-seeking” municipalities in Austria apparently still are, proves the small Upper Austrian town Aspach. Competitors keep spreading the rumour that there was no legal tender issued in connection with this PPP model (?) in wastewater management.

Christian Hasenleithner’s view: “Aspach and WDL have concluded a sale & lease back contract for a period of 18.5 years. De facto, the municipality sold the sewer network (not the treatment plant!) for e 4.3 million to WDL Infrastruktur GmbH. The municipality continues to use the network and pays a leasing rate to WDL Infrastruktur GmbH in return. By the way, a similar model was used in the case of Grieskirchen already in 2001.”

The municipality thus gained liquidity from the deal. At the same time, a partner was found who has the know-how to maintain the value of the wastewater system. However, Aspach remains responsible for its upkeep. The municipality can use the funds for example for the redemption of loans, but also for reserves for the future maintenance of the sewer network or the treatment plant.

Hasenleithner emphasises the subtle difference: “WDL is not involved in Aspach’s operation management! We have rather assumed the ‘management of the company’. We thus focus exclusively on the optimisation of the company – i.e. the organisation of operations, such as the dates for sewer flushing, the cost-optimisation of treatment plant operation or advantages in purchasing. In addition, the WDL provides a personnel reserve for the municipal plant attendant.”

Thus, the “Aspach Project” was definitely not subject to an obligation to tender! After the expiry of the leasing period, the municipality has the following three options (“option contracts”):

• The sewer network returns without further cash flow to the responsibility/accounting of the municipality against payment of the residual value, the “most realistic variant” (for Hasenleithner).
• Aspach prolongates the leasing contract – and has thus the possibility to accumulate once more.
• The municipality hands the facilities over to the lessor – with a special agreement for the future.

Like for many other providers in the market, WDL, too, makes profit with the number of serviced municipalities. Definite advantages are the combination of management and consulting, “because thereby we know exactly how rural structures function,” says Hasenleithner. “And this synergy does simply not function without the formation of larger units! Synergies also arise for the clearly secondary business sector projecting. Operation and financing, however, remain our primary focus.”

For the near future, Hasenleithner does not expect a major PPP boom in Austria as far as the sector “subsidised water management” is concerned. In spite of very extensive efforts by the Ministry for Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management (BMLFUW), a “ripple effect” could not be achieved. Hasenleithner: “Normally, a service area still consists of not more than three villages!”

However, a WDL study for the Ministry in sixty Austrian municipalities has shown that there is enough optimisation potential. A model for optimal (wastewater) structures is for Hasenleithner the Czech Republic. “There, the supply and disposal areas are as large as three to five of them in Austria, and I think, that the ‘optimal unit’ may even be one size larger.”

Thus, WDL GmbH. (a.o.) is on the best way to grow into a regional player by a multitude of offers for small municipalities. However, by the delaying resistance of many a local politician and the still ongoing privatisation/liberalisation debate, Austria will not be “divided” for a long time.

In the course of the concentration process, however, one dispute remains important that Wilhelm Molterer triggered with his plans: the question, whether a domestic urban water management “shrunken down” to one or a few larger players was more “vulnerable” to takeovers by big foreign water corporations or – on the contrary – whether it was safer.

Offers in this regard to regional companies have not become known so far. Due to the relative failure of foreign providers in Austria as yet, the last word might however not have been said in this connection. With regard to WDL, Christian Hasenleithner confirms that neither an initial public offer nor a participation of a foreign partner is planned!
(aqua press Int. 3/2005, Mag. Christof Hahn)

Contact & Information:

Wasserdienstleistungs GmbH/WDL
GF DI Christian Hasenleithner
Gruberstraße 40-42, A-4020 Linz
Tel.: +43/732/3400-6740