On Oct 2 2025, there was a fire at a Chevron refinery in El Segundo, CA. Given that this occurred during a period of heightened tensions with Russia due to Ukraine's oil industry bombing campaign and numerous airspace incursions in Europe that may be attributable to Russia, this market focuses on whether the El Segundo fire was caused by a deliberate attack (though in the interest of having clear resolution criteria, the attack does not need to be linked to Russia, or be proven to be any specific mechanism like a drone vs. planted incendiary device vs. something else)

I will not bet in this market.

Resolution criteria

• Resolves YES if an official investigation or two reputable news sources publicly conclude that the October 2–3, 2025 fire at Chevron’s El Segundo refinery was caused by a deliberate attack (e.g., arson, sabotage, terrorism, or a malicious cyber/physical act) by an individual or group. Acceptable sources include statements by at least two of (WSJ, NYT, Economist, Financial Times, Washington Post, ProPublica), or at least one (press release or formal report from USA law enforcement or USA government sources), which unambiguously identify the cause as deliberate malicious action.

• Resolves NO if authorities conclude the cause was accidental, equipment/process failure, negligence, or remains undetermined without evidence of a deliberate attack by October 31, 2026.

Clarifications and examples

• Routine hot work or permitted activity that unintentionally led to a fire does not count as a “deliberate attack.”

• Statements only posted on Twitter/X or other social media sources, even from verified government or law enforcement sources, will NOT resolve this market. To qualify, government/law enforcement statements must be visible on a website with a URL ending in .gov. or on the primary website for that agency/law enforcement organization.

• Statements must be unambiguous. Some examples:

  • "law enforcement is investigating (Russian involvement/criminal action/terrorism)" --> Does not resolve

  • "attack determined to be (Russian involvement/criminal action/terrorism)" --> Resolves YES

  • "parts of what may be an incendiary device were found" --> Does not resolve

  • "an (incendiary/explosive device) was found" --> Resolves YES (clearly malicious)

  • "a welding torch was found" --> Does not resolve (not clearly malicious)

  • "a drone was found" --> Does not resolve (not clearly malicious)

  • "law enforcement determined that the fire was caused by a cyber attack, which did not intend to start a fire" --> Resolves YES (clearly malicious)

  • "law enforcement determined that the fire was caused by a careless hobbyist who lost track of their drone" --> Does not resolve (this is borderline enough that I'd let the market time out before resolving NO)

  • "a person was arrested/indicted in relation to the fire" --> Does not resolve (not yet convicted)

  • "a person was convicted of deliberately starting the fire" --> Resolves YES

  • "authorities (are investigating/suspect) the cause as (negligence/workplace safety violations)" --> Does not resolve

    "the cause was determined to be (negligence/workplace safety violations)" --> Resolves NO

• Update 2026-03-17 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator is resolving this market NO based on a report from Chevron's El Segundo Refinery Director stating the fire was caused by pipe corrosion missed in inspections. The creator acknowledged this deviates from the strict source criteria in the description (which required a .gov source), but judged that waiting for an OSHA report is unreasonable given uncertainty about its timing, and that the internal Chevron finding is sufficient for NO resolution.