# Assessment of the Vulnerability of Selected Key Elements of Rail Transport. Slovak Case Study
## 1 Introduction
The methodology in question is divided into two levels, where the critical nature of the road network section is assessed first and then followed by the vulnerability assessment of the road infrastructure object. Another example of a transport infrastructure project is the SeRoN. The project focused on exploring the effects of human error factors on the road network, focusing on bridges and tunnels. The project was developed in cooperation with the UK, Switzerland, Austria, and Belgium and its output was a methodology for identifying and evaluating critical road infrastructure. The US is one of the countries that places great emphasis on security, protection of critical infrastructure, and its elements. This is also reflected in the revision of the National Strategy for Physical Protection of Critical Infrastructure and Key Elements, which is currently the most comprehensive material in the world dealing with KI issues. As this issue has been given ample scope, methodologies related to vulnerability assessment have also been developed. One such method is RAMCAP--risk analysis and management for critical asset protection. The creator of the method is the Institute of Innovative Technologies (ASME, New York, NY, USA) in 2004-2006. RAMCAP was created to assess the risks of infrastructure terrorism, considering various types of threats as well as the assessment of infrastructure renewal. The methodology combines performance-based evaluation and structural analysis of the component. The assessment of risks and recoverability consists of seven steps: element characteristics, threat characteristics, impact analysis, vulnerability analysis, threat analysis, risk/renewal analysis, and risk/renewal management [13; 14]. In the Slovak Republic, there is a methodology developed by the Ministry of Interior of the Slovak Republic, entitled Methodology for Evaluating Selected Risks at the National Level, which entered into force on 1 July 2013. The methodology was developed by synthesis of the knowledge on the HRV models (Hazard Risk Vulnerability Assessment) to assess risks and vulnerability of an area. It is based on general theoretical principles applied in risk management and uses positives and negatives of HRVA models, information and analytical tools used in the SR, and material and technical capabilities of crisis management authorities [15]. On the basis of the findings of the previous analysis, it can be concluded that:  
* In most projects and methodologies, vulnerability and/or resilience are seen mainly in relation to the safety of the object. * Most projects and expert work focus on the elements of national and transnational critical infrastructure. The issue of critical infrastructure protection is salient, but regional or territorial infrastructure should also be considered essential. Critical elements in rail transport include elements that can be important strategic or critical elements for the transport service of the region and for ensuring the safety, operability, and continuity of transport in the region. Rail operators are aware of these aspects and therefore monitor and protect locations where traffic functionality and safety may be disrupted. However, they do not yet have a comprehensive system or unified procedures for such an approach. The analysis of the current situation shows that there has not been a system for assessing the vulnerability of rail infrastructure so far, despite its increasing importance. A team of employees of the Faculty of Safety Engineering of the University of Zilina in Zilina decided to address this gap. A multi-level model for vulnerability assessment of key elements of rail transport infrastructure, described in this article, has been designed by the authors with a view to establishing a system for vulnerability assessment of key elements in rail transport with a defined algorithm and essential components in the form of measurable items.