One of the interesting (to me) items in the article is that it framed the use of body scanners as clearly an agency (administrative) decision, rather than a legal (that is, codified) one.

For rule-making authority to have the force of law, the 90-day comment period is mandated ... does that mean the decision to apply these scanners isn't enforceable (and thus, litigable)? TSA has seemingly worked around this, as there is no aggrieved party (and thus, no standing), due to their opt-out provisions. That seems doubly wrong, and disrespectful of the legal process.