Appropriate Methods in Determining the Event Mean Concentration and Pollutant Removal Efficiency of a Best Management Practice

  • Maniquiz, Marla C. (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Disaster Prevention Research Center, Kongju National University) ;
  • Choi, Ji-Yeon (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Disaster Prevention Research Center, Kongju National University) ;
  • Lee, So-Young (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Disaster Prevention Research Center, Kongju National University) ;
  • Cho, Hye-Jin (Highway Research Division, Infrastructure Research Department, Korea Institute of Construction Technology) ;
  • Kim, Lee-Hyung (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Disaster Prevention Research Center, Kongju National University)
  • Received : 2010.10.01
  • Accepted : 2010.11.22
  • Published : 2010.12.30


This study attempted to develop and suggest a more appropriate method for the determination of event mean concentration (EMC) and pollutant removal efficiency of a stormwater best management practice (BMP) considering rainfall. The stormwater runoff and hydrologic data gathered from 22 storm events during a 28-month monitoring period on a swirl and filtration type of BMP were used to evaluate the developed methods. Based on the findings, the modified EMC method resulted in lower (average) values than the overall EMC, although the differences were not significant (P>0.05). By comparison, the developed 'Rainfall Occurrence Ratio' (ROR) method was most significantly correlated (r=0.967 to 988, P<0.009) with the other existing removal efficiency determination methods such as the 'Efficiency Ratio' (ER), 'Summation of Loads' (SOL) and 'Regression of Loads' (ROL) methods. In addition, the ROR method gave the highest efficiency values, with no significant differences with any of the pollutant parameters, unlike the other three methods. These results were obtained because the ROR method integrated both pollutant loading and rainfall, which are not considered by the other three methods. Therefore, this study proved the suitability of the modified EMC and ROR methods for application in other BMP monitoring studies.


  1. Ministry of Environment (MOE). Water environment management master plan. Gwacheon: MOE; 2006.
  2. Ministry of Environment (MOE). The strategy of water control in four major rivers in Korea. Gwacheon: MOE; 2004.
  3. Bannerman RT, Owens DW, Dodds RB, Hornewer NJ. Sources of pollutants in Wisconsin stormwater. Wat. Sci. Technol. 1993;28:241-259.
  4. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). Handbook: urban runoff pollution prevention and control planning, Washington, D.C.: U.S. EPA; 1993. Report No.: EPA 625-R-93/004.
  5. Hatt BE, Fletcher TD, Deletic A. Treatment performance of gravel filter media: implications for design and application of stormwater infiltration systems. Wat. Res. 2007;40:2513-2524.
  6. Kim LH, Lee SH. Characteristics of pollutants and dynamic EMCs in a parking lot and bridge during storms. J. Korean Soc. Wat. Qual. 2005;21:248-255.
  7. Choi JD, Choi YH, Lim KJ, Shin YC. Soil erosion measurement and control techniques. In: International Workshop on Newly Developed Technology for Soil and Water Conservation; 2005 May 31-Jun 3; Suwon, Korea.
  8. Jung YJ, Stenstrom MK, Jung DI, Kim LH, Min KS. National pilot projects for management of diffuse pollution in Korea. Desalination 2008;226:97-105.
  9. Winer, R. National Pollutant Removal Performance Database for Stormwater Treatment Practices. 2nd Ed. Prepared by Center for Watershed Protection for U.S. EPA Office of Science and Technology; 2000.
  10. Kim LH, Jeong SM, Ko SO. Determination of first flush criteria using dynamic EMCs (event mean concentrations) on highway stormwater runoff. Wat. Sci. Technol. 2007;55:71-77.
  11. Greenberg AE, Clesceri LS, Eaton AD, American Public Health Association (APHA), American Water Works Association, Water Environment Federation. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. 18th ed. Washington, D.C.: APHA; 1992.
  12. Marsalek J. Pollution due to urban runoff: unit loads and abatement measures, PLUARG. Windsor, Ontario: International Joint Commission; 1978.
  13. Irish Jr. LB, Barrett ME, Malina Jr. JF, Charbeneau RJ. Use of regression models for analyzing highway storm-water loads. J. Environ. Eng. 1998;124:987-993.
  14. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). Urban stormwater BMP performance monitoring, Washington, D.C.: U.S. EPA; 2002. Report No.: EPA-821-B-02-001.
  15. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). Results of the Nationwide Urban Runoff Program. Vol. I: Final report. Washington, D.C.: Water Planning Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; 1983.
  16. Martin EH, Smoot JL. Constituent-load changes in urban storm water runoff routed through a detention pond-wetland system in central Florida. Tallahassee: U.S. Geological Survey; 1986. Report No.: Water resources investigation report 85-4310.
  17. Kim LH, Ko SO, Jeong SM, Yoon JY. Characteristics of wash-off pollutants and dynamic EMCs in parking lots and bridges during a storm. Sci. Total Environ. 2007;376:178-784.
  18. Lee CS, Seo GT, Lee JH, Yoon YS, You JJ, Sin CK. Long term monitoring of storm surface runoff from urban pavement road in Korea. Environ. Eng. Res. 2008;13:184-191.

Cited by

  1. Flow and mass balance analysis of eco-bio infiltration system vol.6, pp.5, 2012,
  2. Treatment of parking lot runoff by a tree box filter vol.51, pp.19-21, 2013,
  3. Application of a gravel wetland system for treatment of parking lot runoff vol.51, pp.19-21, 2013,
  4. Export of non-point source suspended sediment, nitrogen, and phosphorus from sloping highland agricultural fields in the East Asian monsoon region vol.188, pp.12, 2016,
  5. Selection of cost-effective Green Stormwater Infrastructure (GSI) applicable in highly impervious urban catchments vol.22, pp.1, 2018,