[Lancey Howard]

By the way, I maintain that the most pertinent part of this story is the environment-friendly lunacy that lead to the production of an inferior, more dangerous foam insulation.

Yeah, point blank, I want to know if NASA was forced by the Clinton EPA in 1997 (or thereabouts) to produce the foam without benefit of freon in its production. I want to know if the environmental extremists and their Democrat sponsors bear responsibility for the horrible deaths of seven astronauts.

[Ken H]

Yeah, point blank, I want to know if NASA was forced by the Clinton EPA in 1997 (or thereabouts) to produce the foam without benefit of freon in its production.

Good question.

[Ken H]

The lead story on the national newsfeed (I think from ABC) on the radio was the change in the foam production in 1997.

They did not give any more details.

They did mention that records of this were being impounded but I don't think it mentioned who was doing the impounding.

[ninenot]

Typically, the EPA will force a MANUFACTURER to change formulations. I think that NASA simply ordered the stuff from manufacturer XYZ who was under EPA scrutiny and had to change the formula.

The fact that the manufacturer advised NASA of the difficulty doesn't change anything--NASA cannot or would not appeal for an exception to EPA "thought" on the matter.