Filter content
by selecting applicable filters below
Indicator 2.8.1
Requirement
The UoC shall ensure that biosolids are appropriately contained.
How Do I Interpret This Requirement?
-
The UoC should develop and implement a biosolids management plan, which includes procedures relating to the containment of biosolids.
-
The appropriate containment of biosolids should consider the risk of runoff during anticipated and/or recurring extreme weather events, such as tropical storms or flooding.
-
This risk is higher when biosolids are removed from culture systems, canals and/or treatment systems.
-
Evidence of Implementation
-
Documents demonstrating the appropriate containment of biosolids. An example may be a biosolids management plan.
-
The management plan may include a flow diagram that outlines key steps for the containment of biosolids.
Auditors Should Confirm
-
Documents, for example a biosolids management plan, have been presented which demonstrate the appropriate containment of biosolids.
-
Conformance should be confirmed through a visual inspection of the site.
Indicator 2.7.4
Requirement
The UoC shall ensure that freshwater-wells used for culture water do not exceed a conductivity of 1,500 micro-mhos per centimeter (µmho/cm) or chloride concentration of 300mg/L. An exception applies where well-monitoring is not permitted by applicable law, in which case regulatory records shall be obtained to provide evidence of conductivity levels.
How Do I Interpret This Requirement?
-
Freshwater wells with a conductivity or chloride concentration above the thresholds in Indicator 2.7.4 will demonstrate that salinisation has taken place.
-
Specific conductance or chloride concentration should be monitored at a frequency adapted to fluctuations due to natural factors, such as seasonal rains.
Evidence of Implementation
-
Records of specific conductance of freshwater wells on, or in proximity to the site (within 1km radius).
-
Records should demonstrate monitoring has taken place at least every six months and considered natural factors, such as seasonal rains.
-
-
Regulatory records obtained where applicable, to demonstrate well-monitoring is not permitted by law.
-
Records shall contain evidence of conductivity testing.
-
Auditors Should Confirm
-
Monitoring records are available for freshwater wells in proximity to the site, which demonstrate either conductivity or chloride concentration is below the relevant threshold specified in Indicator 2.7.4.
-
Monitoring has taken place at least every six months and considered natural factors, such as seasonal rains.
-
Regulatory records are available for instances where well-monitoring is not permitted by law.
-
The records demonstrate conductivity testing has taken place.
Useful Resources
-
Hand-held refractometers can be used to measure salinity. These devices are appropriate for salinities of approximately 2 or 3 ppt, but they are not sensitive enough to determine if sites are causing the salinisation of freshwater bodies.
-
The quickest and easiest method to evaluate salinity of water is to measure specific conductance with a conductivity meter. An alternative method is a chloride test kit, which is typically cheaper.
Indicator 2.7.3
Requirement
The UoC shall only discharge effluent water of a salinity level equal to or lower than the salinity level of the receiving waterbody or natural wetland. An exception applies to waterbodies and natural wetlands that have naturally periodic varying salinity levels, in which case the salinity level of the effluent water shall be within range of the natural variation.
How Do I Interpret This Requirement?
-
Salinity levels are: Freshwater (limnetic; <0.5 ppt), slightly saline (oligohaline; 0.5-4.9 ppt), moderate saline (mesohaline; 5-17.9 ppt), highly saline (polyhaline; 18-29.9 ppt) and seawater (euhaline; 30-34.9 ppt).
-
River estuaries are an example of a waterbody that have periodic varying salinity levels. These can also be referred to as poikilohaline waterbodies.
-
Salinity testing of effluent water in the receiving waterbody or natural wetlands should be conducted.
-
Salinity levels in the receiving waterbody or natural wetlands may be obtained from credible sources, e.g. results of government monitoring.
-
To comply with the exception in the indicator, salinity testing in the waterbody or natural wetland should take place. Alternatively, test results can be obtained from credible sources, e.g. scientific or government body.
-
Results should then be compared to the salinity level of the effluent water to determine whether it is within the range of natural variation for the receiving waterbody or natural wetlands.
-
Evidence of Implementation
-
Results of salinity testing for effluent water and in the receiving waterbody or natural wetlands.
-
If applicable, reports or measurements determining whether waterbodies and natural wetlands have naturally varying salinity levels.
-
Reports or measurements determining whether the salinity level of the effluent water is within the range of the natural variation for the receiving waterbody or natural wetlands.
-
Auditors Should Confirm
-
Salinity test results have been presented which determine one of the following:
-
Salinity level of the effluent water is equal to or lower than the salinity level of the receiving waterbody or natural wetlands.
-
Salinity level of the effluent water is within the range of natural variation for the receiving waterbody or natural wetlands that have naturally varying salinity levels.
-
Indicator 2.7.2
Requirement
The UoC shall not discharge brackish or saltwater effluent over land.
Evidence of Implementation
-
The location and/or route of the discharge of brackish or saltwater effluent to demonstrate discharge does not take place over land.
-
Examples of evidence may include maps/plans of the discharge locations/routes.
Auditors Should Confirm
-
Evidence has been presented, such as maps/plans, to demonstrate brackish or saltwater effluent is not discharged over land.
Indicator 2.6.22
Requirement
Indicator scope: point source systems in waterbody types A and B The UoC shall conduct DO monitoring downstream from the outflow point and shall demonstrate that daily diurnal DO (DDDO) fluctuation is ≤65% saturation, following the method outlined in Appendix 8 (8.11).
How Do I Interpret This Requirement?
-
For UoCs located in tidal systems, timing of measurements should correspond with high and low tides, to reflect variations related to the tidal regime.
-
The UoC can conduct DO monitoring immediately downstream of the last site in a waterbody whilst still following the sampling method in Appendix 8 (8.11).
-
This may reduce sampling costs when there are multiple sites discharging point source effluent releases to a Type B waterbody near each other.
-
The methods outlined in Appendix (8.11.2 and 8.11.3) shall be used to record DO concentrations used to determine daily diurnal DO (DDDO).
-
Any missed samples or deviations in sampling time should be accompanied by a written justification.
Evidence of Implementation
-
Records that DO measurements correspond to high and low tides in tidal systems.
-
The location of the sampling point, demonstrating that measurements have taken place downstream from the outflow point.
-
Results of daily DO monitoring and DDDO fluctuation calculations.
Auditors Should Confirm
-
DO measurements have taken place at high and low tides in tidal systems.
-
DO measurements have taken place downstream from the outflow point.
-
The UoC has presented results of the DDDO calculations based on DO measurements collected in accordance with the methods outlined in Appendix 8.11.1 and 8.11.2.
-
Confirm the fluctuation level based on the DDDO calculation is ≤65% saturation level.
-
Written justifications were provided if there were any missed samples or deviations in the sampling time.
Indicator 2.6.16
Requirement
The UoC shall use a treatment system prior to the discharge of effluent water that ensures: – ≥65% of Total Suspended Solids (TSS) are captured; and, – concentration of settleable solids in effluent water is <3.3ml/L.
How Do I Interpret This Requirement?
-
Methods to measure Total Suspended Solids (TSS) can be found in Appendix 8 (8.12).
-
Concentration of settleable solids (ml/L) can be measured by calculating the volume of solids that settles to the bottom of a conical cone (Imhoff cone) in one hour.
-
More sophisticated methods such as spectrophotometer readings can also be used to measure settable solids.
Evidence of Implementation
-
Details and location of the system used to treat effluent prior to discharge.
-
Evidence regular testing of TSS and settleable solids has taken place. Quarterly testing would demonstrate best practice.
-
Results from the testing of point source releases which demonstrate ≥65% of TSS are captured and the concentration of settleable solids in effluent water is consistently <3.3ml/L.
Auditors Should Confirm
-
A treatment is in place and located prior to the point of discharge.
-
Results of testing from the UoC which confirm the treatment system captures ≥65% of suspended solids and that the concentration of settleable solids in effluent water is <3.3ml/L.
Indicator 2.6.10
Requirement
The UoC shall, after the determination of the water quality baseline, conduct monitoring of the water quality parameters listed below, following the method outlined in Appendix 8 (8.8):3434An exemption applies if the mean of Secchi Disk (SD) depth calculated over any rolling two-year period remains ≥10m. – Total Nitrogen (TN); and, – Total Phosphorous (TP); and, – Dissolved Oxygen (DO); and, – Secchi Disk (SD) depth; and, – Chlorophyll-a (Chl-a).
How Do I Interpret This Requirement?
-
Quarterly monitoring ensures the UoC can capture any seasonal or inter-annual variations in the data collected.
-
Measurements should be timed to coincide with, or immediately follow, annual turnover events when the waterbody is not permanently stratified (holomictic).
-
The UoC should calibrate equipment used to measure DO, TN, TP, SD and Chl-a according to the technical specifications of the equipment.
-
The UoC should conduct measurements of the parameters in-situ.
-
Samples may be sent for laboratory analysis, however variability with sample maintenance during transit can lead to inconsistent results. This is particularly evident with DO and Chl-a samples.
Evidence of Implementation
-
Documentation outlining the sampling plan to conduct quarterly monitoring and that is in accordance with Appendix 8 (8.8).
-
Quarterly monitoring data has been collected and submitted to the ASC Water Quality Calculator. Data should be submitted at least annually.
-
Evidence that quarterly monitoring data has been timed with annual turnover events (where applicable).
-
That equipment to measure DO, TN, TP, SD and Chl-a has been calibrated according to technical specifications.
Auditors Should Confirm
-
The sampling methodology to conduct quarterly monitoring is in accordance with Appendix 8 (8.8).
-
The UoC has conducted quarterly monitoring of the water quality parameters and submitted data to the ASC Water Quality Calculator at least annually.
-
Evidence has been provided demonstrating the UoC has calibrated equipment to measure DO, TN, TP, SD and Chl-a in accordance with the technical specifications.
Useful Resources
-
Paerl, H.W., Scott, J.T., McCarthy, M.J., Newell, S.E., Gardner, W.S., Havens, K.E., Hoffman, D.K., Wilhelm, S.W. and Wurtsbaugh, W.A., 2016. It takes two to tango: when and where dual nutrient (N & P) reductions are needed to protect lakes and downstream ecosystems. Environmental science & technology, 50(20), pp.10805-10813.
-
Information on the appropriate use of Secchi Disks can be found here: ‘What is a Secchi disk’, accessed November 22, 2023: <https://www.nalms.org/secchidipin/monitoring-methods/the-secchi-disk/what-is-a-secchi-disk/>
-
Example of a method for Chl-a measurements made using ethanol extraction followed by spectrophotometric measurement at wavelengths 665 and 750nm (using accredited methods: EPA method 445.0: Method 445.0 In Vitro Determination of Chlorophyll a and Pheophytin ain Marine and Freshwater Algae by Fluorescence, accessed November 22, 2023: https://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public_record_report.cfm?Lab=NERL&dirEntryId=309417
-
Cost effective example for measuring using in-situ Chl-a using a field spectroflurometer include the FluoroSense handheld fluorometer manufactured by Turner Designs and the YSI handheld meter with EXO1 (#599080) or EXO2 (#599201) sondes.
-
Hamdhani, H., Eppehimer, D.E., Walker, D. and Bogan, M.T. (2021) Performance of a Handheld Chlorophyll-a Fluorometer: Potential Use for Rapid Algae Monitoring. Water, 13, 1409: https://doi.org/10.3390/w13101409
-
Kuha, J., Järvinen, M., Salmi, P. and Karjalainen, J. (2020). Calibration of in situ chlorophyll fluorometers for organic matter. Restoration of Eutrophic Lakes, 847, 4377-4387: <https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-019-04086-z>
Indicator 2.6.9
Requirement
The UoC shall conduct a water quality survey and determine the water quality baseline, including the trophic status, following the method outlined in Appendix 8 (8.8).
How Do I Interpret This Requirement?
-
The data collected as part of the 24-month site level monitoring survey is submitted by the UoC to the ASC Water Quality Calculator.
-
The water quality baseline is based on 24-months of monitoring data from the site level monitoring survey. However, the following phased approach is permitted when sites do not have sufficient data prior to the initial audit:
-
The water quality baseline is characterised by the ASC Water Quality Calculator, in accordance with Appendix 8 (8.8).
-
The baseline should be conducted per site and per waterbody. The results should then be shared with members of the WQMN.
-
The baseline determines whether primary production in the waterbody is limited by nitrogen (N), phosphorous (P), or if it is co-limited. Other factors (than N or P) may be limiting primary productivity in a waterbody.
-
The UoC should present evidence of these other limiting factors (e.g. temperature or altitude) where applicable.
-
-
Harmful algal blooms (HABs) and Adverse Turnover Events (ATEs) are required to be reported as part of the baseline characterisation. The number of ATEs and HABs that have occurred can be recorded by conducting the following:
-
Reviewing news media and consulting local stakeholders. Alternatively, reviewing data collected by regulatory bodies where available.
-
Reporting the number of ATEs and HABs which have resulted in fish mortality events (farmed or wild) or the mortality of other aquatic species.
-
Reporting instances where fish mortality events or loss of other aquatic species can be attributed to natural phenomena. These instances will not count towards the frequency limits for ATEs and HABs.
-
Reporting the number of ATEs and HABs, as determined by national or regional regulatory/scientific organisations.
-
Evidence of Implementation
-
The methodology and analytical methods used to conduct site level monitoring survey are in accordance with Appendix 8 (8.8).
-
The sampling methodology for collecting 24-months of data for the site level monitoring survey, if this is not available at the initial audit.
-
The results of the site level monitoring survey, as determined by the ASC Water Quality Calculator.
-
The results of the 24-month baseline characterisation, as determined by the ASC Water Quality Calculator.
-
Records of HABs and ATEs from the last 10 years.
Auditors Should Confirm
-
A water quality monitoring survey has been conducted by the UoC. Results are presented from the ASC Water Quality Calculator.
-
A sampling methodology has been presented for collecting 24-months of data for the site level monitoring survey, if this is not available at the initial audit.
-
The data collected for the site level monitoring survey followed the methodology and analytical measures outlined in Appendix 8 (8.8).
-
A water quality baseline has been characterised. Results are presented from the ASC Water Quality Calculator.
-
The results of the review by the UoC into adverse turnover events and harmful algal blooms in the waterbody.
Useful Resources
-
Vollenweider, R.A., Rinaldi, A. and Montanari, G. (1992) Eutrophication, structure and dynamics of a marine coastal system: results of ten-year monitoring along the Emilia-Romagna Coast (Northwest Adriatic Sea). Marine Coastal Eutrophication, Proceedings of an International Conference, Bologna, Italy, 21–24 March 1990, Pages 63-106: <https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-89990-3.50014-6>
-
More information about the equations used for TSI assessment, including the relevant peer-reviewed scientific literature, is provided in Carlson, R.E. and Simpson, J. (1996) A Coordinator’s Guide to Volunteer Lake Monitoring Methods. North American Lake Management Society, 96 p.
Indicator 2.6.8
Requirement
The UoC shall establish a Water Quality Monitoring Network (WQMN), following the method outlined in Appendix 8 (8.7). An exception applies where a WQMN is already established, in which case the UoC shall participate in the WQMN.
How Do I Interpret This Requirement?
-
Evidence of spatial management at a national/regional level for water quality can be used by the UoC to demonstrate that the intent of Indicator 2.6.8 has been met. To use this evidence, the following should be met:
-
The boundaries of waterbodies are defined.
-
Waterbodies are managed to ensure water quality remains at a ‘Good’ or ‘Very Good’ status.
-
Where required, corrective actions are implemented by the regulator and complied with to ensure water quality status improves.
-
-
Examples of spatial management at a national/regional level include the European Union Water Framework Directive.
-
It is the responsibility of the UoC to conduct outreach to ASC Certified sites and non-certified sites belong to ASC Certificate Holders if a Water Quality Monitoring Network (WQMN) has not been established.
-
-
Examples of outreach can include:
-
Copies of correspondence (written and email).
-
Agendas and minutes of meetings.
-
Third-party stakeholder testimony.
-
-
As per Appendix 8, section 8.7, a Terms of Reference (ToR) document shall be drafted and agreed upon by all members of the WQMN upon formation, which includes the following:
-
The membership list and commitments from members to meet the WQMN requirements, as outlined in Appendix 8 (8.7.1).
-
The assignment of a focal point, who will coordinate data sharing, the drafting of the ToR and agreement to the ToR by all members of the WQMN.
-
The focal point should ideally be a rotating position, though determination is left to discretion of the WQMN membership.
-
A commitment to review the ToR on a regular basis (for example every 12 months) or as and when required, such as when changes in membership of the WQMN occur, or when the waterbody demonstrates evidence of excessive nutrient loading, eutrophication or trophic status shifts.
-
Evidence of Implementation
-
An agreed map of the WUM by members of the WQMN, which includes the components outlined in Appendix 8 (8.7).
-
The map should be updated on an annual basis where required.
-
Evidence of outreach efforts and responses (where applicable) to ASC Certified site and non-certified sites belong to ASC Certificate Holders if a WQMN needs to be established.
-
If a WQMN has been established, the UoC presents evidence that they have joined the WQMN or the UoC can demonstrate the spatial management of water quality at a national/regional level.
-
A ToR has been agreed upon by all members of the WQMN, which includes commitments to the WQMN requirements, as outlined in Appendix 8 (8.7.1).
Auditors Should Confirm
-
A map of the WUM has been developed by the WQMN and presented by the UoC, which includes the components outlined in Appendix 8 (8.7).
-
Evidence of outreach efforts and responses to ASC Certified site and non-certified sites belong to ASC Certificate Holders if a WQMN needs to be established.
-
Auditor discretion should be used to determine if sufficient levels of outreach has been conducted, when such outreach has not been reciprocated.
-
Evidence that the UoC has formed/joined a WQMN, or that the UoC presents evidence that water quality is managed at a national/regional level.
-
A ToR has been presented, which has been agreed upon by all members of the WQMN. The ToR includes commitments to the WQMN requirements, as outlined in Appendix 8 (8.7.1).
Indicator 2.6.7
Requirement
The UoC shall ensure that the person conducting water quality monitoring has the necessary competencies, experience and training. The UoC shall ensure that the person defining the WUM has the necessary competencies. In cases where regulatory requirements are defined, the UoC shall ensure that the person defining the WUM complies with these requirements.
How Do I Interpret This Requirement?
-
To demonstrate competence, personnel responsible for conducting water quality analysis and defining the WUM should be able to:
-
Perform the required sampling and/or analysis.
-
Operate sampling/analytical equipment.
-
Develop, change, verify and validate methods.
-
-
Use suitable reference standards.
-
Analyse sampling and calibration results, including statements of conformity and interpretations.
-
Record, review and authorise the release of results.
-
-
Contribute to or produce reports that can clearly and concisely explain whether the results meet the requirements.
-
Have completed relevant training modules.
-
-
Evidence of Implementation
-
The personnel responsible for conducting water quality analysis and defining the WUM have competencies to do so, for example a suitable level of education and/or experience.
-
Where applicable, the personnel meet national requirements/qualifications for the spatial definition and/or management of waterbodies.
-
-
Relevant training modules have been completed by the personnel responsible for conducting water quality analysis and defining the WUM.
Auditors Should Confirm
-
The personnel responsible for conducting water quality analysis and defining the WUM have the necessary competencies.
-
Where applicable, national requirements/qualifications are met by the personnel defining the WUM.
-
-
Evidence has been presented that relevant training modules have been completed.
