2.1. Study Area
Bupyeong-gu, Incheon, South Korea, which has an area of 31.98 km2, was selected as the target area for this study (Fig. 1). Bupyeong-gu is a typical downtown area, which includes a variety of sectors such as residential areas, commercial areas, and industrial areas. Since 2009, impervious surfaces have increased in this area along with the continuous promotion of several projects that include improving residential and urban environments (Lee et al. 2014). Furthermore, river flooding due to the localized heavy rains has caused the pollutants of urban sewage to flow into the Gulpo stream in Bupyeong-gu, which can lead to serious problems in terms of the generation and outflow of non-point pollutants. Thus, impervious surface and non-point pollution management are urgently needed in this area (Yang 2006).
Lee (2018b) created an optimal large-scale impervious surface map of Bupyeong-gu, Incheon, and determined that the area consisted of a pervious surface area of 11.43 km2, an impervious surface area of 20.5 km2, and a water system area of 0.15km2. An impervious surface map of the land use area was drawn by overlapping the impervious surface map with the land use area map. The study area corresponds to an “urban area” in the classification of the properties of the land use area map. As shown in Fig. 2, the impervious surface ratio was 82.1% in the residential area, 91.7% in the commercial area, 94.1% in the industrial area, and 30% and in the green area. In particular, the impervious surface ratios of the residential, commercial, and industrial areas were higher than 80%. This indicates that there is an urgent need to manage and improve the impervious surfaces.
2.2. Analysis of the Domestic and Overseas Application Cases of the Stormwater Utility Fee
2.2.1 Application case of the stormwater utility fee in the US
In the US, the federal government assigned the responsibility of managing the stormwater runoff that contains pollutants and sediments to the regional governments. As a result, this increased the stormwater runoff management cost of the regional governments, and they needed to establish a financing plan. The stormwater utility fee system was introduced in the 1960s, and in the beginning, the rates were charged based on the water usage. In the 1990s, the Water Environment Federation issued the “User-Fee Funded Stormwater Utilities.” As the emergence of GIS technology enabled the detailed measurement and management of the impervious surfaces, many municipalities changed the rating system to charging based on the impervious surface area. The collected fees are being used by the municipalities for the sewage pipe management cost as well as the facility investment, controlling the stormwater runoff, and treatment.
The city of Charlotte, which is an urban area, has a two-level rating system. Charlotte charges $5.18 USD per month if the impervious surface area is 2,000 ft2 or less if it is a single family residence, and $6.72 USD per month if it is larger than 2,000 ft2. Montgomery County’s charging system has seven levels depending on the impervious surface area, and it is based on the equivalent residence unit (ERU). For apartment houses and nonresidential buildings, they charge $88.40 USD per year per 1 ERU (2,406 ft2) for the actual calculated impervious surface area (Table 1). The city of Portland developed charges that are based on the average impervious surface area of 2,400 ft2 for single- and two-family houses, and an average impervious surface area of 1,000 ft2 for three- and four-family houses. For multi-family houses, commercial areas, and industrial areas that exceed them, the rates are charged based on the impervious surface area (Table 2). Washington D.C. uses a progressive rating system with six levels of impervious surface areas. The charging criterion for the residential area is $2.57 USD per month per 1 ERU, and for nonresidential areas, the rates are charged in proportion to the actual impervious surface area (Fig. 3).
Table 1. Montgomery County's water quality protection fee charging system.
Type
|
Division
|
Water quality protection fee ($ USD)
|
Independent detached house, connected detached house, and agricultural facilities
|
Level 1 (1,000 ft2 or less)
|
29.17
|
Level 2 (1,000 - 1,410 ft2)
|
44.20
|
Level 3 (1,410 - 3,412 ft2)
|
88.40
|
Level 4 (3,412 - 3,810 ft2)
|
132.60
|
Level 5 (3,810 - 5,815 ft2)
|
172.80
|
Level 6 (5,815 - 6,215 ft2)
|
221.00
|
Level 7 (larger than 6,215 ft2)
|
265.20
|
Apartment houses and nonresidential buildings
|
(Total impervious surface area/ERU) × $88.40
|
Table 2. Portland's stormwater runoff fee.
Area
|
Division
|
Stormwater runoff rate ($ USD)
|
Monthly average fee ($ USD)
|
Residential area
|
Single family and two-family houses
|
Off-site
|
$15.54 per month per family
|
$23.90
|
On-site
|
$8.36 per month per family
|
Three- and four-family houses
|
Off-site
|
$6.47 per month per family
|
$9.96
|
On-site
|
$3.49 per month per family
|
Five or more family houses
|
Off-site
|
$6.47 per month per 1,000 ft2 for the impervious surface area
|
$9.96/1,000 ft2
|
On-site
|
$3.49 per month per 1,000 ft2 for the impervious surface area
|
Nonresidential area *
|
Off-site
|
$6.86 per month per 1,000 ft2 for the impervious surface area
|
$10.55/1,000 ft2
|
On-site
|
$3.69 per month per 1,000 ft2 for the impervious surface area
|
*The stormwater runoff fee is separately charged between on-site (private property) and off-site (right to use public facility).
As a result, most municipalities charge a stormwater utility fee based on the impervious surface area of each parcel, and the imposition criterion was changed from the parcel area or the water usage to the impervious surface.
When comparing the impervious surface area, the representative value (e.g., ERU) of the impervious surface area was set for each municipality and the fees were calculated accordingly. For the residential areas, some municipalities applied the same rate of 1 ERU to every parcel while considering the size and management cost of the city. Meanwhile, other municipalities applied different rates by setting different levels of the impervious surface area.
2.2.2 Application case of the stormwater utility fee in Germany
In 1985, the Federal Administrative Court and Local High Courts of Germany declared that charging sewage fees based on the water usage was problematic in terms of fairness (Kwon and Hur 2010). The Federal Administrative Court of Germany ruled that in order to improve the legal fairness of the fees that are based on the polluters pay principle, the sewage fees must be collected separately for the stormwater runoff processing fees and general sewage fees. Consequently, the municipalities changed their fee collection system and established a legal basis for urging the utilization and infiltration of stormwater. In addition, they reflected the specific matters for the application of the separate calculation method for the sewage ordinance in accordance with the circumstances of the city.
In the case of Berlin, the water bill is divided into a basic fee and usage-based fee, and the sewage fee is divided into wastewater, stormwater, manure, and manure sludge fees. The wastewater fee is charged in proportion to the water discharge (water usage) in addition to the basic fee, whereas the stormwater fee is charged based on the impervious surface area (Table 3). Berlin changed to a sewage separate fee system in 2000 and they charged 1.897 Euros per 1 m2 for the impervious surface in addition to the sewage fee.
Table 3. Berlin’s water and sewage fee structure (Berlin, Germany).
Division
|
Note
|
Water fee
|
Usage-based fee
|
Charged according to the actual water usage
|
Basic fee
|
Charged according to the caliber of the water meter
|
Sewage fee
|
Wastewater fee
|
Discharge-based fee
|
Charged according to the actual water usage
|
Basic fee
|
Charged according to the caliber of the water meter
|
Stormwater fee
|
Charged in proportion to the area of the impervious surface in which the stormwater flows into public sewage facilities (1.897 Euros/m2)
|
Manure fee
|
-
|
Manure sludge fee
|
-
|
2.2.3 Analysis of the overseas stormwater utility fees and implications
In general, the stormwater utility fee is charged based on the flat rate, impervious surface area, development density, and the generation of stormwater runoff. The flat rate charges the same fee for every household; however, it is difficult to apply the same rate to areas that have different discharge amounts. The stormwater runoff generation creates high administrative costs for the monitoring and measurements. The development density method charges the fee according to the ratio of the impervious surface area for the total land. However, it is difficult to implement this in comparison to the ERU method because the pervious and impervious surfaces must be considered. In contrast, the method of charging the fee that is based on the impervious surface area of each parcel is mainly used in developed countries because it is an indirect indicator of the stormwater runoff and generation of non-point pollutants. Furthermore, the specific implementation methods of the system, such as the charging and collecting methods, did not differ significantly between the two countries (Table 4). Therefore, the optimal large-scale impervious surface map by Lee (2018a) can be used as the basic data for calculating the stormwater utility fee. If the impervious surface area is applied based on the stormwater utility fee, the fee decreases slightly for users with a small impervious surface area such as detached houses; however, it increases significantly for users that have a large impervious surface area, such as commercial buildings, which is fair. The stormwater utility fee system is advantageous in terms of being able to cover the impervious surface management cost of private properties that can cause stormwater runoff that flows into public sewage treatment facilities. Like the US and Germany, which have similar problems, South Korea should also prepare related management funds by charging fees that are based on the impervious surface of each parcel.
Table 4. Comparison of the funding characteristics for the stormwater utility fee between the US and Germany.
Division
|
US (stormwater utility fee)
|
Germany (regenwassergebühr)
|
Background
|
- Deterioration of the water quality by the stormwater runoff
- Reinforced stormwater runoff regulation of the environmental protection agency (EPA) and stable stormwater management funding
|
- The rate system was reformed according to the ruling of the Federal Administrative Court that the existing stormwater and wastewater combined rate system is not fair.
|
Charging criteria
|
- Stormwater fee is charged based on the polluters pay principle.
- Charged in proportion to the past water usage.
- Charged in proportion to the impervious surface area of each parcel
- Municipalities use different methods for the fee calculation
|
Charging method
|
- Charged together with the water bill
|
Charging effect based on the impervious surface
|
- Fees decreased for small detached houses and apartment houses
- Fees increased for large commercial buildings
|
2.2.4 Related systems in South Korea
In South Korea, the sewage fees are specified by the ordinances of the local governments in accordance with Article 61 (e.g., Charge on Burden-Causing Entities) and Article 65 (Use Fees, etc.) of the Sewerage Act, and the local government’s sewage fees are different. The fee calculation is specified according to the rules of the Ministry of the Interior and Safety and it is collected based on the rate table. The targets of the fee are classified into the household, public bathhouses, operations, and businesses, and different rates for the monthly usage are applied to them (MOE 2018). In South Korea, the operation costs of the sewage treatment plants and wastewater pump stations are classified as wastewater treatment costs. Meanwhile, the operation costs for the stormwater pipes and stormwater pump stations of the separate sewage pipes are classified as stormwater treatment costs. However, the cost for the combined sewage pipes is classified as the wastewater treatment cost even though the wastewater and stormwater flow together and they are not classified by the appropriate ratio of the wastewater and stormwater. Thus, it appears on the surface that the domestic sewage fee system does not include stormwater; however, it can be internally interpreted that it includes stormwater. It has an unreasonable structure in which the water applications (including groundwater) generally pay for the stormwater treatment costs. To improve this unreasonable structure, a reasonable sewage fee system that separates wastewater and stormwater fees and replaces the stormwater fee with a stormwater utility fee is required.
In the “2050 Sewerage Vision Public Hearing” that was held in 2012, a “stormwater utility fee” design method for stormwater management funding was presented. The targets of the stormwater utility fee were land owners that have their land hydraulically connected to public stormwater (wastewater) pipes. It was suggested that the standard cost covers the cost that is required for stormwater management such as conduit and stormwater treatment, and the method of imposition is different according to the land cover, which is a factor that influences the stormwater discharge. To introduce the stormwater utility fee, a method of amending the current law should be considered because enacting a new law can result in large resistance. In addition, the stormwater utility fee should be applied in a phased manner, and it must be preceded by the people’s empathy and understanding. In 2012, at the “policy discussion meeting for introducing a rainwater tax in Seoul,” there was a case of serious opposition such as a resistance to tax increases and transferring the responsibility to create an impervious surface to the citizens. To enhance the people’s acceptance of the stormwater utility fee system, phased applications that are based on South Korea’s current rate system must be considered. The separate calculation and settlement of the stormwater utility fee must be implemented step by step. This can be achieved by separating the sewage fee into wastewater and stormwater in the beginning and later switching to the fee calculation while considering the impervious surface area of each parcel.
When the fee is linked with the stormwater management, the fee must be calculated while considering the impervious surface area that is based on the current land cover information. Therefore, a concrete scenario is required, which consists of the following three phases. In phase 1, the current sewage fee is simply separated into wastewater and stormwater. In phase 2, the impervious surface ratio based on the land use area is applied. In phase 3, the fee is specifically calculated for the individual parcels.
2.3 Simulated calculation of the stormwater utility fee for the study area
According to Lee (2018b), the total area of all the apartment complexes in Bupyeong-gu was approximately 3.65 km2, and the total impervious surface ratio was 75.8%. When considering the 189 complexes, 43 had no previous surface with a 100% impervious surface ratio. Although some complexes have flower gardens, they were classified as impervious surfaces if they did not play the role of a pervious surface. When considering the apartment complexes in Bupyeong-gu, the lowest impervious surface ratio was 57.1%, and the highest impervious surface ratio was 92.9%, which excludes 43 complexes with a 100% impervious surface ratio. According to the building ordinance of Incheon, parcels with an area of 2,000 m2 or larger must include a 15% landscape area; however, some apartment complexes do not comply with this rule. Therefore, impervious surfaces need to be actively managed in apartment complexes with an impervious surface ratio that is 85% for higher.
Consequently, for the simulated calculation of the stormwater utility fee in the study area (Bupyeong-gu, Incheon), the sewage fee was separated into wastewater and stormwater fees, and the fee calculation that considered the impervious surface area was presented in phases. These calculated phased fees were applied to a large apartment complex while considering the number of households and the unit area type in order to check the changes in the stormwater utility fee. Bupyeong-gu, Incheon is currently charging wastewater and stormwater management costs together as a certain ratio of the water fee in proportion to the water usage. Therefore, the monthly water usage statistics of Bupyeong-gu, Incheon were collected, and the fees were determined by calculating the actual sewage fee.
To change the fee system to a fee linked with stormwater management, the fee must be calculated while considering the impervious surface area that is based on the land cover status. Hence, a scenario is required, which consists of the following three phases. In phase 1, the current sewage fee is simply separated into wastewater and stormwater. In phase 2, the impervious surface ratio that is based on the land use area is applied. In phase 3, the fee is specifically calculated for the individual parcels. The phased hypothetical scenario was established and the fees were calculated by performing a simulation to check the change in the the stormwater utility fee based on land use area (Fig. 4).
2.3.1 Collecting water usage statistics and data processing
When considering the data to calculate the stormwater utility fee, the statistics for the monthly water and sewage usage and the fees in 2014, along with the hydrant spatial data for the Shapefile format, were gathered from the Incheon Metropolitan City Waterworks Authority. The water and sewage fees were calculated by converting the water and sewage rate table into a function using Microsoft Excel. These were used as the basis of the stormwater utility fee estimation scenario. It was determined that there were missing data for the monthly water and sewage usage along with the fees due to the closure and movement of the hydrants. In this case, the business category was estimated and the aperture size was calculated in reverse based on the fee, and the related information was added. The improvement results were converted to space data by combining them with the hydrant spatial data. In addition, the properties of the water and sewage usage and fees were inputted into the serial cadastral map, which overlapped with the hydrant spatial data. In some cases, one hydrant was used by multiple parcels, in which the aerial orthophotograph and digital topographic map were checked. They were joined and converted to a single parcel on the serial cadastral map by using the “merge” function of ArcGIS 10.2. The impervious surface ratio of the joined parcels was calculated again, and the water and sewage usages and fees were inputted into the properties of the serial cadastral map. Finally, the water and sewage fees resulted in a calculation of 68,457 results in Bupyeong-gu.
2.3.2 Simulated calculation scenario for the stormwater utility fee
In the phase 1 scenario, when considering the people’s acceptance, the current sewage fee was divided into the wastewater and stormwater fees by using a simple ratio. When the sewage fee is collected, the stormwater cost is charged as a stormwater utility fee. In this study, a general distribution ratio of 6:4 was applied. Table 5 shows the differences in the charging method between the current sewage fee and the phase 1 scenario. Meanwhile, in the phase 1 scenario, the fee is calculated irrespective of the impervious surface ratio for each land use area and parcel. However, the total amount of the stormwater utility fee in Phase 1 was used as the reference amount for the fee distribution in phases 2 and 3.
Table 5. Differences in the charging method between the current sewage fee and the fee of the phase 1 scenario.
Division
|
Current
|
Phase 1 scenario
|
Payment notification method
|
- Sewage fee
(e.g., sewage fee of 8000 won)
|
- The existing total amount is separated as the sewage fee and stormwater utility fee.
(e.g., sewage (wastewater) fee of 4,800 won (60%), stormwater utility fee of 3,200 won (40%))
|
As for phase 2, Lee (2018b) reported that South Korean cities have a high impervious surface ratio for each land use area, and there is no significant difference between the parcels in the land use area. Furthermore, unlike other countries, South Korea has many apartment complexes, and most of the detached house districts have a high impervious surface ratio. When considering these facts, the fee by the land use area was applied in phase 2 while considering the administrative convenience. The stormwater utility fee in the total sewage fee is calculated by distributing the fee in consideration of the average impervious surface ratio for each land use area. The concrete fee calculation method is presented as follows.

For the “total stormwater utility fee” in Eq. (1), the total stormwater utility fee that is calculated in the phase 1 scenario (corresponding to 40% of the total sewage fee) is used. For the impervious surface area that is based on the land use area, the calculation result from the impervious surface map was produced from a previous study (Lee 2018a).
The phase 3 scenario is similar in comparison to the developed countries and it can be implemented after the fee for the stormwater runoff management is stabilized. The impervious surface ratio is calculated for the individual parcels, and the fee is determined in proportion to the calculated impervious surface ratio. For the total sewage fee, the stormwater utility fee is distributed and the contribution rate of each parcel is considered. The concrete fee calculation method is expressed as follows.

The phase 3 scenario can be used to calculate the impervious surface ratio of the individual parcels irrespective of the land use area. It is fair and reasonable because the contribution to the stormwater runoff management can be applied quantitatively.