Recirculating Aquaculture

Systems (RAS) Module

Contact information

Address:

Aquaculture Stewardship Council

Daalseplein 101,
3511 SX Utrecht, the Netherlands
+31 30 239 31 10

[Link]

Trade register number 34389683

ASC Recirculating Aquaculture System (RAS) Module – version 1.0 – April 2022 1
VERSION CONTROL, AVAILABLE LANGUAGE(S) AND COPYRIGHT
NOTICE

The Aquaculture Stewardship Council (ASC) is the owner of this document.

Please contact the ASC at standards@[Link] with any comments or questions

regarding the content of this document.

Version control

Document version history:

Version: Approval Approved Release Effective Remarks/changes:

date: by: date: date:

V1.0 March 11th, Board of April 25th, October

2021 Directors 2022 25th, 2022

It is the responsibility of the user of the document to use the latest version as published on the
ASC website.

To ensure the continued effectiveness of the ASC standards, as outlined in the ASC’s Theory
of Change, the revision must occur every three to five years. The next scheduled review of
the ASC RAS Module is 2025. However, the content of the ASC RAS Module will be
embedded within the ASC Farm Standard. Once the ASC Farm Standard becomes effective
the RAS Module will be withdrawn.

Available language(s)

The official version of this document is English. The ASC may translate the RAS Module into
additional languages as necessary. In case of any inconsistencies and/or discrepancies
between available translation(s) and the English version, the online English version (pdf-
format) will prevail.

Copyright notice

This document is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported

License. Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be requested via standards@asc-
[Link].

ASC Recirculating Aquaculture System (RAS) Module – version 1.0 – April 2022 2
PURPOSE AND SCOPE

The aim of this document is to summarise the key environmental and social impacts
associated with Recirculating Aquaculture Systems (RAS). RAS farms seeking certification
will be certified against the appropriate ASC species standard as well as the ASC RAS module
in order to ensure compliance with the ASC vision. The ASC Alignment Project will focus
specifically on the impacts of different farming systems. This is thus considered an interim
solution. The data collected within this interim solution will be fed back into the Alignment
Project once available.

Background Information on Recirculating Aquaculture Systems (RAS)

Aquatic organisms can be farmed in open, closed and semi-closed systems. Certification of
aquatic products from open and semi-closed systems like sea-cages, ponds or flow-through
systems have been the main focus of the ASC standard at the beginning. In recent years the
number of recirculating aquaculture systems (RAS) has significantly increased and thus
facilitated the need to adapt the ASC standard to incorporate these highly technical systems.

RAS have been under development for the last forty years with significant improvements
especially in terms of water re-use and hence reduced environmental impacts (Timmons and
Ebeling, 2007). RAS operate by filtering water in order to reuse it within the same system. It
is thus defined as a technology for farming aquatic organisms by reusing the water in the
production (Bregnballe, 2015). RAS can be used to farm any aquatic species (fish,
crustaceans, bivalves, seaweed) at different levels of intensity. The main resource inputs into
RAS are the aquatic species itself, feed, water and electricity/energy. The last two are often
used to define different levels of RAS.

One of the main reasons for the development of RAS are the increasing environmental
regulations in countries and regions with limited access to both land and water. As water is
treated and reused, the overall amount of water needed is significantly lower than for other
aquaculture systems. Furthermore, the controlled environment allows for higher stocking
densities resulting in lower land use. Different types of recirculation systems are usually
defined by their level of recirculation.

Within the ASC RAS Module all intensive tank and raceway systems with high rates of
recirculation, biological filtration, and other treatment systems will be considered RAS and
have to comply with the additional indicators in this document as well as all applicable
indicators in the subsequent ASC Standard.

ASC Recirculating Aquaculture System (RAS) Module – version 1.0 – April 2022 3
RAS Module – Additional Indicators

The following section lists the additional indicators a RAS farm (as defined above) needs to
comply to in addition to the species-specific standard, in order to obtain ASC certification.

RAS PRINCIPLE 1: MINIMISE NEGATIVE EFFECT ON WATER

RESOURCES

RAS Criterion 1.1: Water Use/ Abstraction Levels

Indicator Requirement
RAS Maximum amount of water that a farm can
50% of the natural water
1.1.1 divert from a natural flowing water body (such
body’s flow immediately above
as river or stream)
the farm1
RAS Amount of diverted water returned to the
1.1.2 natural water body > 90%

RAS All use of underground pumped water has

1.1.3 been permitted by the regulatory authorities Yes

RAS Well depths are tested at least annually and

1.1.4 results made publicly available2 Yes

Rationale – Aquaculture facilities utilising flowing water require a constant supply of fresh
water. Farms removing or diverting freshwater resources require appropriate and effective
management to oversee water allocations and ensure efficient utilisation.
Farms that divert water from a river or stream cause a reduction in the water body’s flow for
the distance between the farm’s inlet and outlet. It is difficult to set a global requirement that
ensures that the remaining flow is sufficient to support the natural flora and fauna. Some
jurisdictions are currently setting minimum flow requirements for a river or stream that farms
need to respect. This is an appropriate local approach. In the absence of such regulation, or

1
Farms will be exempted from this standard if they can demonstrate that they are in a jurisdiction that regulates
the farm’s water abstraction based on a minimum vital water flow for the natural water body, and the farm’s water
use respects that minimum vital flow. Farms would also be exempt if they can demonstrate abstraction amounts
respect limits determined by a scientific study that estimates minimum vital flow.
2
Well depths must be tested at similar times of the year, with results submitted to ASC. Wells that are by law not
allowed to be opened are exempt from this indicator.

ASC Recirculating Aquaculture System (RAS) Module – version 1.0 – April 2022 4
an equivalent scientific study, the RAS Module requires farms to always leave at least half of
the natural flow in the water body.
Groundwater requires attention because it represents the abstraction and displacement of
typically higher-quality water. Well or aquifer recharge is the process of water being
replenished in the ground. When abstraction increases beyond the rate of recharge, the result
is a net reduction in the water table.
Groundwater levels vary naturally from year to year, making a rigid global requirement
impractical. These requirements instead require a farm to keep track of water tables over time
and to make that information public. In addition, all use of underground water must be explicitly
permitted to avoid situations in which water use by a farm would be undisclosed to regulators.
It should be noted that a plentiful and sustainable water supply is of critical importance for
aquaculture producers; thus, protection of these resources is paramount to the farm’s viability.

RAS Criterion 1.2: Water Quality of Effluent and Receiving Water Body

Indicator Requirement

RAS Maximum total amount of phosphorus released

1.2.1 into the aquatic environment3 per tonne (t) of < 4 kg/t of fish produced
fish produced over the previous 12-month unless specified differently by
period the species standard

RAS Minimum oxygen saturation in the outflow,

1.2.2 measured continuously (minimum daily) 3 60%

RAS Total organic carbon (TOC) levels, sulphide No significant change in TOC
1.2.3 levels or redox potential in sediment levels, sulphide levels or redox
immediately outside the outfall4 attributable to potential in sediment in
the farm operations as evidenced by control comparison to the control site
RAS Allowance for discharging saline water to
1.2.4 natural freshwater bodies5 None

3
Farms discharging directly in the sewage system must comply with requirements set by the local authorities
and/or treatment plant
4 If there is an impact of the farm beyond the outfall/discharge point of the farm, it is up to the farm to make an

argument for a reasonable AZE (allowable zone of effect) based on scientific modeling. In that case, this indicator
would be applicable immediately at the edge of the AZE
5 Surface freshwater bodies adjacent to farm property or receiving waters discharged from the farm. Freshwater is

characterized by a specific conductance of less than 1,500 μmhos per centimeter and a chloride concentration of
less than 300 milligrams per liter. These values correspond to salinity inferior to 1 ppt. Farms that can demonstrate
that surrounding waters and soils have a salinity of 2 and above using a hand-held refractometer will not be required
to provide measurements of conductance or chloride concentration. Water bodies displaying freshwater conditions
only during the peak rainy season are considered as brackish water bodies under these standards.

ASC Recirculating Aquaculture System (RAS) Module – version 1.0 – April 2022 5
Rationale: Effluent from aquaculture farms can have an environmental effect on rivers,
streams and other bodies of water that receive the discharge. Phosphorus is one of the key
nutrients to control the risk of eutrophication of receiving water bodies and organic enrichment
of the sediment. It is a stable nutrient in that it does not volatilize like nitrogen compounds. It
is also added to feeds in proportions that can allow estimations of other waste constituents
(organic matter and nitrogen).
The ASC developed the phosphorus load requirement based on a unit of production, making
it an indicator of how well a farm is minimising nutrient discharges per of fish produced. From
an environmental standpoint, farms should aim for as low an annual load of phosphorus per
tonne of fish as possible. Farms can lower their phosphorus load on the environment by using
a better feeding strategy (ratio and feed distribution), improving feed conversion efficiency
through the improvement of the environmental conditions in the farm, utilising feed that is more
digestible and has lower phosphorus content, and by applying cleaning technologies such as
settling ponds and filters. Production facilities are encouraged to develop methodologies to
reduce their phosphorus burdens over time, while ensuring farmed fish are getting the
appropriate nutrients to protect the nutritional content and health of the animals.
In an attempt to limit the oxygen burden on natural water bodies from the release of nutrients,
these requirements include a minimum saturation level of dissolved oxygen at discharge.
Total organic carbon (TOC) levels, sulphide levels and redox potential are considered the best
available chemical indicators for benthic health and thus aquatic ecosystem health. By
comparing surveys downstream and upstream from the farm’s effluent discharge, or at the
outfall and a defined reference point, the requirement aims to isolate the impact of the
production facility, and ensure that no significant impact is occurring.
The release of effluents can cause salinization in surface freshwater bodies and non-saline
soils near the discharge. It was thus determined that saline water must not be release in
natural freshwater bodies.

ASC Recirculating Aquaculture System (RAS) Module – version 1.0 – April 2022 6
RAS Criterion 1.3: Waste Disposal

Indicator Requirement

RAS Evidence of implementation of biosolids

1.3.1 (sludge) best management practices (BMP)
Yes
(see Appendix I)

RAS Specific conductance or chloride concentration The specific conductance or

1.3.2 of sediment prior to disposal outside the farm chloride concentration values
must not exceed those of the
soil in the disposal area6

Rationale: Biosolids are a mixture of organic waste and sediment produced or accumulated
through the farming activity. Biosolids discharged into natural water bodies are of concern
because solids can restrict light penetration in water bodies, accumulate downstream, cover
plants and habitat and cause general shallowing of water bodies. Additionally, the organic
component of biosolids will exert an oxygen demand as the organic matter decays. The
simplest and best way to minimise these impacts is to remove sediments from the water
column and allow organic matter to decay prior to discharge. Functionally, this infers the use
of a settling basin to let solids settle out of the water column, and for bacterial decomposition
and oxygen depletion to occur at the same time prior to disposal of biosolids. Many RAS farms
use filtration systems to reduce the amount of suspended solids in the water. To provide
assurance of appropriate disposal of biosolids, these requirements include a small number of
BMPs.

6
If a farmer has a contract outside the farm to discharge soil in a specified location, they are permitted to do as
long as no disposal occurs in a natural habitat or public property without written permission of the community.

ASC Recirculating Aquaculture System (RAS) Module – version 1.0 – April 2022 7
RAS PRINCIPLE 2: USE OF RESOURCES IN AN ENVIRONMENTALLY
EFFICIENT AND RESPONSIBLE MANNER

RAS Criterion 2.1: Energy Consumption and Greenhouse Gas Emissions on

Farms

Indicator Requirement

RAS Presence of records and evidence of all energy

Yes, measured in kilojoule/t
2.1.1 consumption on the farm and representing the
fish produced/ production
whole life cycle (as outlined in Appendix II)
cycle

RAS Records of greenhouse gas (GHG7) emissions8

2.1.2 on farm and evidence of an annual GHG
Yes
assessment (as outlined in Appendix II-A)

RAS Documentation of GHG emissions of the feed9

2.1.3 used during the previous production cycle (as
Yes
outlined in Appendix II-B)

RAS Evidence of a documented strategy to reduce

Yes, within three years of the
2.1.4 GHG per unit of production (measured in
initial audit
kilojoule/t fish produced)

Rationale: Climate change represents perhaps the biggest environmental challenge facing
current and future generations. Because of this, energy consumption used in food production
has become a source of major public concern. The ASC recognizes the importance of efficient
and sustainable energy use. Therefore, these indicators will require that energy consumption
in the production of fish should be monitored on a continual basis and that growers should
develop means to improve efficiency and reduce consumption of energy sources, particularly
those that are limited or carbon- based. The data collected in this process will help the ASC
set a meaningful numerical requirement for energy use in the future. Energy assessments are
a new area for producers. Requiring that farms do these assessments will likely raise

7 For the purposes of this standard, GHGs are defined as the six gases listed in the Kyoto Protocol: carbon dioxide
(CO2); methane (CH4); nitrous oxide (N2O); hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs); perfluorocarbons (PFCs); and sulphur
hexafluoride (SF6).
8
GHG emissions must be recorded using recognized methods, standards and records as outlined in Appendix II
9 GHG emissions from feed can be given based on the average raw material composition used to produce the

fish/crustacean (by weight) and not as documentation linked to each single product used during the production
cycle. Feed manufacturer is responsible for calculating GHG emissions per unit feed. Farm site then shall use that
information to calculate GHG emissions for the volume of feed they used in the prior production cycle.

ASC Recirculating Aquaculture System (RAS) Module – version 1.0 – April 2022 8
awareness of the issues related to energy and build support for adding a requirement in the
future related to the maximum energy of GHG emissions allowed.

RAS Criterion 2.2: Species-Specific Requirements for Recording

Indicator Requirement

RAS Minimum stocking density Records are available

2.2.1

RAS Maximum stocking density Records are available

2.2.2

RAS Feed Conversion Ratio Records are available

2.2.3

RAS Protein Retention Efficiency Records are available

2.2.4

RAS Annual average farm survival rate Records are available

2.2.5

RAS Handling frequency and methods Records are available

2.2.6

Rationale: Species-specific requirements -- especially those linked to the important ‘welfare’

issue -- are critical especially when it comes to closed, highly technical systems. Since the
welfare topic is not yet sufficiently addressed by the ASC standards (See the ongoing ‘Fish
Welfare’ project), the gathering and recording of data linked to the indicators below will also
potentially enable ASC in the future to set requirements in those areas. This data will be used
in the Alignment Project and allow for better informed decisions.

ASC Recirculating Aquaculture System (RAS) Module – version 1.0 – April 2022 9
References

Bregnballe, J., (2015). A Guide to Recirculation Aquaculture. FAO and EUROFISH.

[Link]

Martins, C.I.M., Eding, E.H., Verdegem, M.C.J., Heinsbroek, L.T.N., Schneider, O.,
Blancheton, J.P., d’Orbcastel, E.R., Verreth, J.A.J., (2010). New developments in
recirculating aquaculture systems in Europe: A perspective on environmental
sustainability. Aquac. Eng. 43, 83–93. [Link]

Timmons, M., Ebeling, J., (2007). Recirculating Aquaculture, 01–007 ed. Cayuga Aqua
Ventures, Ithaca.

ASC Recirculating Aquaculture System (RAS) Module – version 1.0 – April 2022 10
Appendix I: Sludge BMP

Methods to mitigate the impacts from fish metabolic wastes on water can range from the
employment of simple settling ponds to the use of advanced technology filters and biological
process. Dealing responsibly with the waste (sludge, liquid slurry, biosolids) from these
processes is a critical element to responsible farm management. The ASC acknowledges that
BMPs related to other principles such as correct feed composition and texture as well as good
feed management practices—such as not storing feed for too long—can also influence the
effectiveness of biosolids capture; however, this section deals with practices for cleaning,
storage and disposal that will minimise the potential impacts of sludge/biosolids being released
into the environment.

All land-based systems shall employ/undertake the following in relation to sludge/biosolids:

- A process flow drawing that tracks/maps the water and waste flow of a farm, including
treatment of waste, transfer of wastes, waste storage and final waste utilisation
options. Flow diagram should indicate the farm is dealing with biosolids responsibly.
(Auditing guidance for evaluating whether the plan indicates responsible use: The
system design shall allow for simple cleaning routines of pipes, sumps, channels and
units.)
- Farm shall have a management plan for sludge/biosolids that details cleaning and
maintenance procedures of the water treatment system. The plan must also identify
and address the farm’s specific risks such as—but not limited to—loss of power, fire
and drought. The management can be evaluated in relation to maintenance records.
- Farm must keep detailed records/log of sludge/biosolid cleaning and maintenance
including how sludge is discarded after being dug out of settlement ponds.
- Biosolids accumulated in settling basins shall not be discharged into natural water
bodies.

Appendix II: Energy Records and Assessment

Subsections

A. Energy use assessment and greenhouse gas (GHG) accounting for farms
B. GHG accounting for feed

ASC Recirculating Aquaculture System (RAS) Module – version 1.0 – April 2022 11
Appendix II – A Energy use assessment and GHG accounting for
farms
The ASC encourages companies to integrate energy use assessments and GHG accounting
into their policies and procedures across the board in the company. However, this requirement
only requires that operational energy use and GHG assessments have been done for the farm
sites that are applying for certification.

Assessments shall follow either the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard or ISO 14064-1
(references below). These are the commonly accepted international requirements, and they
are largely consistent with one another. Both are also high level enough not to be prescriptive
and they allow companies some flexibility in determining the best approach for calculating
emissions for their operations.

If a company wants to go beyond the requirement and conduct this assessment for their entire
company, then the full protocols are applicable. If the assessment is being done only on sites
that are being certified, the farms shall follow the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard and/or
ISO 14064-1 requirements pertaining to:

- Accounting principles of relevance, completeness, transparency, consistency and

accuracy
- Setting operational boundaries
- Tracking emissions over time
- Reporting GHG emissions

In regard to the operational boundaries, farm sites shall include in the assessment:

- Scope 1 emissions, which are emissions that come directly from a source that is either
owned or controlled by the farm/facility.
o For example, if the farm has a diesel generator, this will generate Scope 1
emissions. So will a farm-owned/-operated truck.
- Scope 2 emissions, which are emissions resulting from the generation of purchased
electricity, heating, or cooling.

Quantification of emissions is done by multiplying activity data (e.g., quantity of fuel or kwh
consumed) by an emission factor (e.g., CO2/kwh). For non-CO2 gases, you then need to
multiply by a Global Warming Potential (GWP) to convert non-CO2 gases into the CO2-
equivalent. Neither the GHG Protocol nor the ISO require specific approaches to quantifying

ASC Recirculating Aquaculture System (RAS) Module – version 1.0 – April 2022 12
emissions, so the ASC provides the following additional information on the quantification of
emissions:

- Farms shall clearly document the emission factors they use and the source of the
emission factors. Recommended sources include the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) or factors provided by national government agencies such as
the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Companies shall survey
available emission factors and select the one that is most accurate for their situation,
and transparently report their selection.
- Farms shall clearly document the GWPs that they use and the source of those GWPs.
Recommended sources include the IPCC 2nd Assessment Report, on which the Kyoto
Protocol and related policies are based, or more recent Assessment Reports.

References (relevant at time of publication of Standard):

- [Link]
- GHG Protocol Corporate Standard Website:
[Link]
- GHG Protocol Corporate Standard Document:
[Link]
- ISO 14064-1 available for download (with fee):
[Link]
- IPCC 5th Assessment Report:
[Link]
- All IPCC Assessment Reports:
[Link]

Appendix II – B: GHG accounting for feed

The requirement requires the calculation of the GHG emissions for the feed used during the
prior production cycle at the grow-out site undergoing certification. This calculation requires
farms to multiply the GHG emissions per unit of feed, provided to them by the feed
manufacturer, by the amount of feed used on the farm during the production cycle.

The feed manufacturer is responsible for calculating GHG emissions per unit feed. GHG
emissions from feed can be calculated based on the average raw material composition used
to produce the fish (by weight) and not as documentation linked to each single product used
during the production cycle.

ASC Recirculating Aquaculture System (RAS) Module – version 1.0 – April 2022 13
The scope of the study to determine GHG emissions should include the growing, harvesting,
processing and transportation of raw materials (vegetable and marine raw materials) to the
feed mill and processing at feed mill. Vitamins and trace elements can be excluded from the
analysis. The method of allocation of GHG emissions linked to by-products must be specified.

The study to determine GHG emissions can follow one of the following methodological
approaches:

1. A cradle-to-gate assessment, taking into account upstream inputs and the feed
manufacturing process, according to the GHG Product Standard
2. A Life Cycle Analysis following the ISO 14040 and 14044 requirements for life cycle
assessments.

Should the feed manufacturer choose to do a cradle-to-gate assessment:

1. It shall incorporate the first three phases from the methodology, covering materials
acquisition and processing, production, and product distribution and storage
(everything upstream and the feed manufacturing process itself).

Should the manufacturer follow the ISO 14040 and 14044 requirements for Life Cycle
Assessment:

1. Feed manufacturers may follow either an ISO-compliant life cycle assessment

methodology or the GHG Protocol product Standard.

Regardless of which methodology is chosen, feed manufacturers shall include in the

assessment:

- Scope 1 emissions, which are emissions that come directly from a source that is either
owned or controlled by the farm/facility.
- Scope 2 emissions, which are emissions resulting from the generation of purchased
electricity, heating or cooling.
- Scope 3 emissions, which are emissions resulting from upstream inputs and other
indirect emissions, such as the extraction and production of purchased materials,
following the Scope 3 Standard.

Quantification of emissions is done by multiplying activity data (e.g., quantity of fuel or kwh
consumed) by an emission factor (e.g. CO2/kwh). For non-CO2 gases, you then need to
multiply by a Global Warming Potential (GWP) to convert non-CO2 gases into CO2-

ASC Recirculating Aquaculture System (RAS) Module – version 1.0 – April 2022 14
equivalent. The ASC provides the following additional information on the quantification of
emissions:

- Farms shall clearly document the emission factors they use and the source of the
emission factors. Recommended sources include the IPCC or factors provided by
national government agencies, such as the USEPA. Companies shall survey available
emission factors and select the one that is most accurate for their situation, and
transparently report their selection.
- Farms shall clearly document the GWPs that they use and the source of those GWPs.
Recommended sources include the IPCC 2nd Assessment Report, on which the Kyoto
Protocol and related policies are based, or more recent Assessment Reports.

References (relevant at time of publication of Standard)

- [Link]
- GHG Product Life Cycle Accounting and Reporting Standard:
[Link]
Reporting-Standard_041613.pdf
- Scope 3 Standards:
[Link]
- ISO 14044 available for download (with fee) at:
[Link]
- IPCC 5th Assessment Report:
[Link]
- All IPCC Assessment Reports:
[Link]

ASC Recirculating Aquaculture System (RAS) Module – version 1.0 – April 2022 15