Updated MSC CoC - ASC CoC Standard

In May 2022, MSCI released ASC CoC Standard v 1.0, as a supplement to existing MSC CoC Standard, applies exclusively to certification holders and applicants who handles ASC certified products in the supply chain. The reason of this improvement is, quote from auditor training, to provide greater value and a higher level of assurance on the ASC logo. Consequently, additional clauses are made to mitigate risks that particularly associate with farm-raised seafood. ????

One of the major add-on requirements is that “organizations whose activities include processing, contract processing, packing or repacking shall be certified by a GFSI recognized scheme or ISO 22000”. What does this move aim for? It is improbable that MSCI concerns food safety issues alone in ASC products rather than MSC ones. More likely, the focus would be ingredient risk assessment of HACCP.? To discover whether “their products are in conformance with any relevant applicable laws, regulations, ASC standards and /or requirements”, 5.2.1.1 (C).

Another change that applies to all ASC CoC certification holders and applicants is to maintain a Food Fraud Vulnerability Assessment Procedure targeting ASC (farm-raised) certified seafood. Seafood fraud is, defined by MSC-MSCI, deceiving with intention for financial or economic gain. In given examples, substitutions, volume conversion, mislabeling, document accuracy, species and provenance misrepresentation have been addressed in MSC CoC. And one possible cause that go beyond the standard is “inclusion of substances that are not consistent with claims (such as non-GMO, feed ingredients)”. For the same reasons, labeling ineligible ASC seafood to be certified is also regarded as fraud.

Several prerequisites are demanded to be eligible for ASC labeling. Seafood must be produced on an ASC certified farm. It is raised with sustainable feeds or feed ingredients are able to be tracked back to sustainable sources. Animal health management requirements are fully satisfied. In the case of shrimp standard, PL and broodstock come from closed loop hatcheries and have creditable SPF status; No medicine treatment is allowed on ASC-labeled shrimp. And last, the seafood is opted to be sold as certified.??

For example, a Canadian seafood processor who makes fish cake and shrimp tempura purchases ASC tilapia and ASC shrimp from a Pan-Asia trading company based in Richmond, BC. How would this processor and the wholesaler, in Canada, cope with CoC amendment?

Antibiotic and other therapeutants residue inspection is remaining a necessary means for safety and quality assurance. If any residue was detected in a shrimp product, then, it does not meet ASC requirements. However, this rule does not apply to Tilapia products for medication is permitted on to be labeled animals and no trace limit is set. Though, if non residue was detected in a shrimp or tilapia product, it does not sufficient to define their eligibility since the sources of feed ingredients could not been verified by residue exams.? ??

Supplier Approval and Verification is another measure that gives product a profile. The trading company / the wholesaler may conduct supplier inspections on primary processing plants. Key factors to this program are: ingredient tracking information, to identify the farm, site, pen / pond and batch that products harvested from; chemical and therapeutant residue screen test on ingredients; and associated records. Moreover, when possible, digging out the list of rejected suppliers by EU, FDA, and CFIA would be a good reference for supplier creditability.