## 6 Benchmark Case Study
The ice conditions on 16 June 2019 were used for the case study, as reported by the Danish Meteorological Institute and presented in Figure 7. Two separate ice regimes overlap with the seabird breeding colony off the NW coast. The ice regimes are reported using Egg codes [38]. To the south and nearest to shore (Egg Code 'G') is one-tenth total concentration of thick first-year ice. Adjacent and to the north (Egg Code 'C') is more severe ice, reported four-tenths old ice, two-tenths thick first-year, and one-tenth medium first-year ice. The results of the risk assessment are presented in Table 15. Having been assigned a Polar class PC5, both vessels received standard RIOs of 27 in the ice regime 'G' (less severe ice conditions), and 2 in regime 'C' (more severe ice conditions). Based on the standard RIOs, the current POLARIS methodology would allow both vessels to undertake 'normal operations' in either ice regime. Following the proposed risk assessment framework, both vessels were assessed as having a high operational exposure level, given the combinations of vessel type, ice conditions, and ecological sensitivity. The cruise vessel had a high life-safety consequence value, which resulted in a high operational exposure level. In the less severe ice regime ('G'), the modified RIO was reduced to 2. This still allowed for 'normal operations' in this ice regime. In the more severe ice regime ('C'), the cruise vessel received a modified RIO of -18 ('operations subject to special consideration'). Given the life-safety consequence of cruise vessels operating around Svalbard, this ice regime should be avoided and the \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Region** & **Vessel Type** & **PESCI** & **C** & **L** & **RIV\({}_{\text{L}}\)** & **RIO (std)** & **RIO (mod)** \\ \hline Ice Regime G & oil tanker & 1 & C2 & L1 & \(-2\) & 27 & 7 \\  & cruise ship & 3 & C3 & L1 & \(-2\) & 27 & 7 \\ \hline Ice Regime C & oil tanker & 1 & C2 & L1 & \(-2\) & 2 & 18 \\  & cruise ship & 3 & C3 & L1 & \(-2\) & 2 & 18 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 15: Risk assessment results for the benchmark case study. Figure 7: Ice conditions around the North West coast of Svalbard, Norway, 16 June 2019 (modified from Greenland Ice Chart, Danish Meteorological Institute, 16 June 2019 [39]). vessel should either choose an alternate route or delay operations in this region until ice conditions become less severe. The oil tanker had a moderate life-safety consequence value and a high spill consequence value. Combined with the high ecological sensitivity of the region, it received a high operational exposure level. In the less severe ice regime ('G'), the oil tanker received a modified RIO of 2, allowing 'normal operations'. In the more severe ice regime ('C'), the oil tanker received a modified RIO of \(-18\), requiring 'operations subject to special consideration'. Given the severity of the ice conditions, the high spill consequence, and the high ecological sensitivity related to the presence of the summer seabird breeding colony, the oil tanker should avoid operations in this ice regime and select an alternate route.