Chicago 16th A output style doesn't match Chicago Manual of Style in terms of multivolume sets

I’m seeing a couple of divergences between the Chicago 16th A output style and the Chicago Manual of Style, 16th edition:

*  With multivolume sets, the abbreviation “vols” in bibliographic references does not include a period at the end (“vols.”) when using the Chicago 16th A output style.  It should:  see, e.g., 14.122 in the Chicago Manual of Style, 16th ed.

*  With multivolume sets, the total number of volumes is not supposed to appear in footnotes (see, e.g., 14.123 in the Chicago Manual of Style, 16th ed.).  But it appears if one uses the Chicago 16th A output style.

If my reading of CMOS is indeed correct, I wonder if the output style could be brought into line with CMOS.

Thanks.