## 6 Benchmark Case Study  
The example scenarios presented above are intended to illustrate the overall application of the framework. A benchmark case study is presented here to demonstrate the application of the proposed framework using inputs from Arctic marine shipping assessments. The case study considers a cruise vessel and an oil tanker navigating along the North West coast of Svalbard, Norway, during the summer  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Vessel Type** & **Rout A** & **Rout B** & **Rout C** \\ \hline bulk carrier &
\begin{tabular}{c} **found** \\ **prevent** \\ **prevent** \\ **prevent** \\ **prevent** \\ **out  
season. Data to support the assignment of life-safety and environmental consequence categories were obtained from published Arctic marine risk assessments and environmental impact assessments. [PERSON] et al. [22] evaluated the life-safety risk for shipping in five different regions of the Arctic. Their evaluation was based on accident data, trends in ship activity, and expert knowledge elicitation. Consideration was given to regional dependencies, such as vessel traffic levels, environmental conditions, and private/government emergency response capacities. Risk matrices were developed for the five regions showing the frequency of different accident types for different vessels, and the severity of the consequences to human health. [PERSON] et al. [22] considered several accident types. For the purpose of this case study, focus was on damage by collision, recognizing that this captured collisions with ice as well as collisions with other ships or marine infrastructure. In the waters around Svalbard, cruise vessels are assessed as presenting a high life-safety risk (S1) and oil tankers are assessed as moderate (S2). A relative spill consequence category for each vessel was assigned based on data from accidents with similar vessel types. The Exxon Valdez oil tanker spilled approximately 41,000 m\({}^{3}\) of crude oil after running aground off the coast of Alaska in 1989 [36]. The Motor Vessel (MV) Explorer cruise ship had approximately 210 m\({}^{3}\) onboard when it sank after striking an iceberg off the coast of Antarctica [37]. Based on these values, the oil tanker and the cruise ship were assigned relative spill consequence categories of high (SC = 3) and low (SC = 1), respectively. The vessel-specific and environmental-specific consequence category values are presented in Table 14. For the purpose of this study, both vessels were assumed to have a Polar ice class of PC5. The Arctic Council [24] has reported areas of heightened ecological sensitivity throughout the Arctic, including around Svalbard. Their evaluation considers the impact of Arctic oil spills and other Arctic shipping-related threats on fish, bird, and mammal activities (e.g. migration, breeding, feeding, etc.). The regional sensitivities have a seasonal dependence. During the summer season, a large seabird breeding colony is present off the NW coast of Svalbard (Figure 6). This region is evaluated as having a high ecological sensitivity to oil spills (E = 3). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Vessel** & **Ice** & **Life-Safety** & **Spill Consequence** \\
**Type** & **Class** & **Category** & **Category** \\ \hline cruise vessel & PC5 & S1 & SC = 1 \\ oil tanker & PC5 & S2 & SC = 3 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 14: Vessel details for illustrative example. Figure 6: Areas of heightened ecological significance around Svalbard, Norway, (modified from Figure A.6 [24]). The Arctic Council reported that the information necessary to evaluate culturally significant regions in the Arctic was not available at this time [24]. In the absence of this data, a default socio-economic protection category of low (P = 1) will be used for the purpose of this case study.