Press Releases

New York City 9/11 Documents, Released Because of 911 Health Watch’s Efforts, Reveal Troubling Details

October 8, 2026

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact:

Benjamin Chevat
911 Health Watch
646 477 1461
Ben.Chevat@911HealthWatch.org

Andrew Carboy
Law Offices of Andrew J. Carboy LLC
212 520 7565
acarboy@carboylaw.com

Matthew McCauley
Turken, Heath & McCauley, LLP.
914 363 6355
mmccauley@thmllp.com

911 Health Watch and its attorneys, Andrew Carboy and Matthew McCauley, reviewed some of the 170,000 pages released so far by the City of New York in settlement of its lawsuits against DEP and the Mayor’s Office. Several documents demonstrate that the City understood early on the dangers posed by the hazardous contaminants, including asbestos, covering lower Manhattan and western Brooklyn.

The documents, released by the Mamdani Administration, are just the first that will be made public and uploaded to the NYC 9/11 portal over the next year.

But these first documents already tell a troubling story: the size and scope of the air quality problems were, in fact, recognized—and ignored.

Benjamin Chevat, Executive Director of 911 Health Watch Inc., stated:

We need to remember that ultimately terrorists bear responsibility for those who died that day and for those continuing to suffer from the health impacts of the toxic chemicals 25 years later. We can’t fault public officials for making mistakes in the early aftermath of the attack, dealing with issues that had never occurred before.

But what we are seeing in an initial review of the first released documents is a disturbing record that, when the problems and hazards were realized, the City, the State and the Federal government did not change course and deal with them head-on.

Mayor Mamdani and Corporation Counsel Steve Banks continue to deserve credit for their agreement to provide these documents, hidden for decades, and for their commitment to releasing even more public records.

Andrew Carboy, 911 Health Watch pro bono counsel, stated:

The New York City Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), which apparently was convicted of federal environmental crimes in August 2001, just weeks before the World Trade Center collapse, led the City’s September 11th air quality response. We cannot identify any other City agency with the dishonor of a felony conviction arising from its core function. The newly released DEP records are revelatory, and not in a good way.

That DEP fought us in Court for years and represented that these records did not exist or could not be found is even more troubling today. Justice Clynes’ May 2026 determination that DEP violated the public records law is further supported by these additional disclosures, which are upsetting to read. We applaud Mayor Mamdani and Corporation Counsel Steve Banks for bringing these difficult truths into the open and prioritizing public knowledge over bureaucratic secrets.

Mathew McCauley, 911 Health Watch Pro Bono counsel, stated:

There is no doubt that these documents are eye opening, and the sting of them will likely get worse. While many believed, hypothesized, and theorized that the City paid little mind to those who lived, worked, and even parked in the area, this is the first time we see their words on paper. It was more important to the City to have people back in the area buying things rather than advising them about the dangers that may lurk for years to come.

Below are excerpts from documents, that are posted on the City’s 9/11 Document Portal, that 911 Health Watch invites the public to review.

1. The City DEP, Lead Agency to Manage WTC Air Quality Issues and Mitigate Toxic Contamination, Pleaded Guilty to a Felony for Violations of Federal Pollution Laws in August 2001

Forgotten in the immediate aftermath of the World Trade Center collapse is the fact that the City Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), the lead agency in responding to the air quality issues for the City of New York, pleaded guilty to two environmental crimes, one a felony, in August 2001, resulting in it being placed on federal probation through 2009.

A review of the first released City documents by 911 Health Watch’s attorneys made this conviction apparent.

The DEP felony conviction came to light because a group of City employees wrote to the federal monitor appointed to supervise DEP’s probation. In their April 2003 letter, newly released on the portal, Environmental Control Board staff (“administrative law judges who enforce asbestos abatement regulations”) raised concerns that carpeting in their office contained high levels of asbestos. These officials wrote:

we are desperately concerned with DEP’s actions and inactions, its refusal to release any information and, most of all, its failure to act to protect its employees and members of the public from a known carcinogen. It has been established that a substantial amount of asbestos is embedded in the carpeting

(Document P: April 21, 2002, Letter to Court Appointed Monitor of NYC Department of Environmental Protection)

911 Health Watch can identify no other public agency in City history with the distinction of being a convicted felon. This is particularly striking given the immediate and important role DEP would assume immediately after.

Most of the DEP federal docket regarding the conviction remains sealed; however, the guilty pleas are a matter of record. What follows, below, is an excerpt from a December 2009 letter by then U.S Attorney Preet Bharara’s Office to the Court (on Southern District of York electronic docket (PACER); not released by the City through the portal):

DEP plead guilty to two environmental crimes in August of 2001. Those crimes were a violation of the Clean Water Act, relating to the discharge of mercury-contaminated water into a tributary of a reservoir in upstate New York which feeds the New York City water system, and a violation of the Toxic Substances Control Act, relating to the unauthorized use of flow-controlling equipment situated directly above the drinking water and with which DEP employees came into contact, that was contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyls (“PCBs”) in a Westchester County water supply facility.

The investigation leading to the filing of those charges revealed not only that DEP had violated applicable environmental laws for decades, but also that DEP employees had been working without appropriate protective equipment in facilities contaminated with hazardous substances.

More fundamentally, the investigation revealed that DEP’s violations had occurred as a result, largely, of a culture that failed to place a priority on compliance, failed to educate its employees about applicable laws, and failed to make the capital improvements necessary to ensure compliance.

In addition, the investigation revealed a climate of fear and intimidation that discouraged employees from taking action to ensure compliance.

In 2006, the federal government extended DEP’s probation by an additional three (3) years because of the “offender’s” additional violation.

Two months after its guilty pleas, the felon agency would describe its leading role in the response to the World Trade Center disaster:

The New York City Department of Environmental Protection determines the scope of the environmental assessments, determines whether levels exceed environmental standards, develops clean-up requirements and monitors the clean-up activities.

(Document Q: October 18, 2001, Memo from DEP Commissioner to OEM.)

2. Two Weeks after the WTC Collapse, Real Estate Board of New York Lobbies the DEP, Mayor’s Office and OEM Concerning Battery Park

With respect to the City’s air quality messaging, REBNY complained the messaging was:
“threatening in tone” “adds to the rumors” and urged “we need to change the message.”

Document A. September 21, 2001: REBNY drafts Guidance & Messaging for Use by DEP:

Deborah Beck (REBNY) asked for our assistance in putting together an advisory for air sampling of asbestos prior to re-occupancy

The ‘draft’, faxed over from REBNY, would be issued in the name of the DEP.

Document B. September 25, 2001, Memo to Deputy Mayor Robert Harding from REBNY:

Perception of Safety.

The recent Department of Health flyers issued would scare anyone from returning to Battery Park City. Their direction warns of outdoor activity and suggest the wearing of long sleeve shirts and pants. This directive is very threatening in tone and adds to the rumors and false perceptions about Battery Park City.

…we share in the responsibility to do whatever is necessary to reopen and re-establish this wonderful community.

Document C. October 3, 2001, Memo to Deputy Mayor Robert Harding and OEM from REBNY:

As much as possible, we have to try to convince the residents that things have returned to normal.

In that regard, a number of critical issues remain:

Air Quality

Although all tests by Battery Park City, the City and the owners are negative. DEP and Department of Health flyers and staff have given the perception of danger and have given conflicting directions on how to handle the situation.

We need to clarify the procedures and change the message.

Document D. October 4, 2001, Memo to Deputy Mayor Robert Harding from REBNY:

We must do everything we can to help tenants in Lower Manhattan and attract new tenants to the district.

Seek special federal legislation to provide insurance against acts of terror.

Document E. October 3, 2001, Mayor’s Office and REBNY Meet:

City Hall (Host is Deputy Mayor Robert Harding)

Document F. October 15, 2001, DEP Revisions to REBNY Draft Letter:

Our (DEP) re-draft of the Real Estate Board’s letter

All areas of Battery Park City have passed this strict protective standard before being open again to the public (edited to add ‘open’ before ‘areas’)

[A]ir monitoring by Federal, State and City agencies has indicated that the levels of particulate matter being detected are below the level of public health concern and do not pose long-term health risks” (identity of person making this edit unclear)

Document G: October 2001, Deputy Mayor Robert Harding Memo:

Written in October 2001, the Harding memo confirms the Mayor’s office anticipated tens of thousands of lawsuits for toxic exposures from the World Trade Center site. The City “flagged” its air quality advisories as a liability concern.

Potential lawsuits against the City… health advisories caused individuals to return to the area too soon (causing toxic exposure)

As the October 4, 2001 memo from REBNY suggested, City Hall then sought to limit liability for its air safety messaging. City officials pursued indemnity and/or “[l]egislative alternatives to limit the City’s liability relating to 9/11/01,” the title of the Harding memo. After City lobbying, in November 2001 Washington, D.C. conferred protections to the City in the form of a liability cap (at $350 million) and $1 billion in retroactive insurance coverage, federally funded.

3. High-Ranking City Officials Discussed Changing Pronouncements that Buildings Were Safe, But Struggled with Resulting Contradictions

In the spring of 2002, the Mayor’s Office convened a Joint Task Force on Air Quality in Lower Manhattan (Document O, March 2002 Task Force Notes).

Mayor Bloomberg designated OEM as the lead agency of a Joint Task Force on air quality in Lower Manhattan to coordinate federal, state and local response to questions regarding air quality in lower Manhattan. The joint task force meets on a weekly basis.

At the first meeting, general counsels from the DEP and City Department of Health, among other officials, discussed changing air quality and building safety messaging.

Their recorded statements are surprising:

“We’ve been telling people everything is OK — we’re just doing this to make people happy”

“How do we reconcile telling people they now have to do testing or clean-up, if we’ve been telling everyone things are OK?”

4. The City Meticulously Collected and Preserved Records, 25 Years Ago

In 911 Health Watch’s lawsuits for release of the September 11th archive, City lawyers asserted, repeatedly, that the records could not be found. At points, the DEP denied the records even existed, arguing that the Court should dismiss our case.

Back in 2002, the City Law Department formed the “World Trade Center Unit” (“WTC Unit”) The WTC Unit employed twenty-five attorneys, seventeen support members, including private investigators, and a large complement of legal assistants and data entry clerks. It stood ready to defend against an anticipated “litigation explosion” of September 11th-related claims.

(Document H, Department of Law, World Trade Center Unit Letter.)

A September 11th archive of City records, compiled, maintained and preserved in accessible and searchable formats, would be foundational to the WTC Unit’s mission. This resulted in a directive/order: “the City must preserve and protect all documents concerning the attacks and their aftermath, including data in electronic form.”

(Document I: September 25, 2003, email.)

And yet, for a quarter century, the City denied these records to the City Council, Congress, and 911 Health Watch.

Now we see that in 2003, the DEP Commissioner, Christopher Ward, directed his Department to collect and preserve the records the public has been seeking ever since and DEP’s lawyers denied existed.

DEP has also been directed to retain any and all records and date that may have been collected concerning the condition of the environment in the areas of Lower Manhattan surrounding the World Trade Center, immediately before and in the months after the events of September 11. This would include records and date relating to the condition of the air…

Do not delete any e-mails or any documents from your personal computer concerning any aspect of the events of September 11,2001, or their aftermath.

You may not delete, erase or otherwise destroy any data relating to any aspect of the attacks or the City’s response from your computers, PDAs, agency electronic data systems and any personal electronic equipment.

(Document I: September 25, 2003, email.)

DEP Commissioner Ward even issued staff work sheets and forms to complete the task.

Earlier, in February 2003, the World Trade Center Unit of the New York City Law Department advised all City departments:

As we have previously advised agencies, because of pending and threatened litigation against the City, it is important that agencies retain all World Trade Center-related documents, whether in paper or electronic form. I am writing now because it appears that a number of City agencies may not have not taken adequate steps to preserve documents stored in electronic form. I understand that the preservation of documents in electronic form may be inconvenient and costly, but it must be accomplished nonetheless.

The failure to retain documents could result in severe sanctions against the City in the lawsuits. Therefore, it is essential that immediate steps be taken at every agency to preserve all electronic evidence that may in any way concern the World Trade Center. The materials to be preserved include e-mail, word processing files, spreadsheets and other information contained on backup tapes, floppy discs, hard drives, servers and any other electronic media.

(Document M: Lawrence Kahn February 27, 2003, email.)

In July 2026, 911 Health Watch took the deposition of the DEP employee with final authority to grant our public records request. This top DEP official testified he denied our records appeal at the direction of a lawyer, and not because he undertook any search or interview of DEP staffers with knowledge of the September 11th archive. This was the first time he ever denied an appeal without conducting a search, and then “signed off” on a decision that was not even his own.

We see now that the records existed all along. For years, the City selected not to disclose them to Congress, the City Council, in Court proceedings, and to advocates.

5. The DEP Provided Mayor Giuliani with Biweekly Reports of Air Quality Issues; These Must Be Released to the Public, Immediately

Although the City has not yet posted them, we are now aware that DEP Commissioner’s office sent Mayor Giuliani “biweekly” reports concerning air quality issues resulting from the World Trade Center collapse. DEP “turned over” these “biweekly reports from the Commissioner to the Mayor” to the New York City Law Department on October 16, 2003. Referencing these advisories to the Mayor, DEP wrote “we recognize the need to provide you with complete information for your use regarding the issues related to the World Trade Center.”

(Document J: October 16, 2003, memo from DEP to Law Department.)

We urge the City to post these critical reports, at once, on the portal. These early memos to then Mayor Giuliani, in September and October 2001, may convey additional information as to what City Hall knew, and when it knew it, about the toxicity in the air of lower Manhattan. Like other documents in the September 11th archive, they remain in the possession of the City Law Department and DEP.

6. The City Objected to Certifying Buildings as Contaminated as a Condition of Federal Funding for Clean Up

In 2002, FEMA proposed making funding for building cleanup contingent upon the City’s certification of a property as “contaminated.”

Emails from the City’s Department’s World Trade Center Unit rejected this proposal citing fears that “certification” would be evidence the City acted improperly in directing re-occupancy, earlier:

The Law Department is concerned that DEP certification that a facility is contaminated at a hazardous level will be used as evidence against the City in actions alleging that the City acted improperly in permitting continued occupancy or reoccupancy of the facility. Accordingly, we would strongly urge that # 2 of the proposed protocol be omitted. The EPA should satisfy itself through means independent of the City that the facility is contaminated at a hazardous level and in need of remediation.

The City advised DEP it was to “refrain from getting involved with certifying that a particular premises is contaminated and in need of remediation.”

(Document N: December 2002 Law Department, DEP, OMB and OEM emails.)

7. Newly Released Documents Indicate the Federal EPA Advised the City to Decontaminate Indoor Spaces and Fire Department Vehicles Professionally

The 9/11 Records the Portal provides demonstrates confusion between City authorities and the EPA concerning professional decontamination of indoor spaces and City-owned vehicles, such as Fire Department engines and trucks (“FDNY vehicles”).

In April 2002, EPA reiterated to the City of New York, that indoor spaces should be professionally cleaned if there is “more than minimal dust.” The City had not advised the public to get professional cleaning. EPA explained that professional abatement was its position since “Day 3” (following September 11th). Yet, in April 2002, City officials called the EPA’s stance a “surprising turn.” In a privileged attorney-client communication, City officials were asked to run damage control, and “help to prove that EPA and City…were working together…and that the EPA consented to the City’s public health policy.”

(Document K: April 2002 emails.)

City officials took issue with the EPA guidance, as it conflicted with the City’s guidance and would make the public fearful:

“If I’m a resident this is not helpful, but rather makes me more paranoid.”

(Document K: April 2002 emails.)

As for the “decontaminated” FDNY vehicles, a memo from Associate City Health Commissioner McKinney highlights the conflict between the EPA and City as to proper safety precautions. The City directed what it described as “cursory” cleaning of FDNY vehicles while the EPA, in contrast, urged rigorous “certified professional asbestos cleaning.” On April 5, 2002, McKinney described:

…203 vehicles identified by FDNY as on the WTC site on September 11th. In the following days, these vehicles were repaired, subjected to cursory cleaning, and placed back into service.

However, writing of decontamination of vehicles generally, the EPA advised the City:

Before any release to the owner, the City should require that the owner arrange to have the vehicle sent directly to a certified professional asbestos cleaning company. Only after the City receives documentation from the cleaning company certifying to the City and to the owner that a satisfactory, thorough cleaning was performed should the vehicle be released.

At this point, as a result of the settlement of 911 Health Watch’s two cases, the public may access 170,000 pages of World Trade Center-related documents. However, these records, including those discussed above, are just fragments of a complete history. We expect the City to release the millions of pages making up the September 11th archive, providing them on the portal. Given the alarming information we see to date, many questions are raised. We welcome the Mamdani Administration’s commitment to transparency and look forward to fully understanding the City’s response to environmental hazards caused by the World Trade Center collapse.