of doors was necessary and qualified personnel should staff the fire control room to monitor the situation until an approved monitoring system was installed. Mr. Dillon pointed out though that Inspector Reitzell stated in an inspection analysis that all testing was completed in February 2000. According to Mr. Dillon, this meant that the systems in question had passed the tests in February 2000 which would be consistent with the building and safety department‟s issuance of the occupancy permit on February 15, 2000. As to Inspector Reitzell‟s notes, Mr. Dillon declared they reflected only a “small portion” of the testing that occurred in 1999 and 2000. Mr. Dillon declared that Mr. Moyer‟s statement in the broadcast that work on the arena interfered with fire safety systems testing was misleading.4 testing and personally inspected the arena. The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it refused to exclude Mr. Dillon‟s declaration. Mr. Dillon was entitled to identify the documents he relied upon in reaching the conclusion the arena was safe when it opened and why it remained such as of June 27, 2007, the date he executed his declaration. (People v. Catlin, supra, 26 Cal.4th at p. 137; Evid. Code, § 802.) Mr. Dillon‟s conclusions were also based on his personal observations of the arena. As to retired Deputy Chief Picciotto, a 29-year member of the New York City Fire Department, read: the exhibits attached to Mr. Snepp‟s declaration; the Smoke Control report; and the documentation concerning the latest Regulation 4 testing. Retired Deputy Chief Picciotto