So why is there no minimum recycled content? Why do they have to be bleached white instead of a natural color that would not require pollutants?
By hello | Apr 6, 2007 8:05:19 AM | Request Removal
Then, of course, they totally ignore these requirements and give the contract to whoever is best connected. And you thought they really meant any of this! Silly.
By Momreads | Apr 6, 2007 11:01:36 AM | Request Removal
I bet that the specs were written by the company that they wanted to get the contract. But of course I am a little cynical.
By dongrissom | Apr 6, 2007 11:03:05 AM | Request Removal
Sounds like the old Mil Specs that the Army used for so many years.
By rjwmsiii | Apr 6, 2007 11:03:36 AM | Request Removal
So, whats so unusual?? That spec is good for any commercial enterprise with a large usuage rate.
By mpgord | Apr 6, 2007 1:01:27 PM | Request Removal
God, thats funny. I think a good sub-headline would have been Having solved all the countrys other problems...
By f_bastiat | Apr 6, 2007 1:32:32 PM | Request Removal
By f_bastiat | Apr 6, 2007 1:38:21 PM | Request Removal
I will guarantee being someone who used to be in direct sales positions there is only one or two vendors who have standard product that meets that specification and I bet the sales reps provided the spec. That is a traditional sales tactic that I have used well to my advantage in the past. I could eliminate most of my competition. Then I can charge more!
By loki1967 | Apr 6, 2007 2:08:48 PM | Request Removal
This is really ridiculous! Its a goof example of how the government wastes our tax money.
By EPollak | Apr 6, 2007 5:00:28 PM | Request Removal
Good grief!
By rsglodowski | Apr 6, 2007 10:09:15 PM | Request Removal
Well, Washington DOES produce a lot of particularly heavy biomass.
By philip_riggio | Apr 6, 2007 10:26:13 PM | Request Removal
Well, Washington DOES produce a lot of particularly sticky biomass.
By philip_riggio | Apr 6, 2007 10:29:10 PM | Request Removal
So, whats so unusual?? That spec is good for any commercial enterprise with a large usuage rate. mpgords point is correct. Such detailed specifications do sound rediculous but any successful product company has specifications this detailed. If they didnt, theyd produce wildly varying products consumers wouldnt buy and theyd go out of business. In this example, whod buy a third roll of Brawny or Scott paper towels if the first roll was great but the second roll absorbed liquids like parchment paper, or had no perforations to separate sheets?
By dmacgregor | Apr 7, 2007 8:53:59 AM | Request Removal
Do they require a minimum amount of recycled paper in the products? If not, why not?
By njcmasterson | Apr 7, 2007 12:57:07 PM | Request Removal
Back in 1989 Congress required Fed agencies to buy recycled paper. Is this another example of Congress exempting itself from the mandates it imposes on the Executive Branch? It would be nice to see recycled content called out in the specs and it would be great if the Architect of the Capitol would be more proactive about greening the Capitol Hill infrastructure. In this case, the tissue in Congressional restrooms is probably OK since most commercial grade sanitary tissue contains postconsumer fiber, anyway.
By rq-ju | Apr 8, 2007 9:52:39 PM | Request Removal
Apolgies for further complicating a tissue issue, but perhaps the most important consideration is excluded, What about recycled content?
By joshua | Apr 17, 2007 10:20:40 AM | Request Removal
Comments