Dgilman, let's try this another way, just for intellectual curiosity.

The SOP says to scan videotapes. Your desire not to have them scanned (i.e. - personal preference based on personal preference) isn't a valid reason for them to even consider ignoring the SOP. The fact that the alternative (ETD scan) might be sufficient (or even better) in your opinion is also irrelevant. But, if you have proof that damage could occur to your videotape, that would be a reason to say that the SOP should be ignored (sort of like Bruce's concern about the Hope Diamond).

So, what evidence do you have that the SOP should *not* be followed? Proof of damage (non-anecdotal) to video tape from exposure to scanners? Proof that ETD scan will detect blades hidden inside a videotape?

(I am not supporting the SOP, as I said above. Rather, I want to know if you have *any* factual basis for your objection to the SOP.)