Pre-Solicitation Question (RB-S III) QUESTIONS AND CLARIFICATIONS FORM

Number Reference Questions Response 1 070-2.2 The RBS-D length requirement only stated length on trailer and allowed for longer vessels than the RBS-III length overall maximum of 31'-9". Is it the USCG's intent that the RBS-III be shorter than the RBS-D?

Intent is for RB-S III to have nearly the same footprint (i.e., moor to same piers and fit in USCG boat houses) as RB-S II.

Requirement is being revised to language similar to:

"Length (overall) – Shall not exceed 37 feet on the trailer and 32 feet 6 inches in water, ..."

2 070-3.3 Does Figure 070-1, Firing Arcs, apply to the fixed mounts described in section 070-3.4.1?

If so, for determining the firing arc of the weapons, can extension of the gunner's arms to rotate the weapon further than he or she can rotate their body position on the deck be included in the total firing arc angle?

Yes, Figure 070-1 applies to the forward and aft working deck fixed mounts.

The gunner's arms can be extended to meet the firing arc requirement.

3 073-1.1 This requirement states a noise level threshold of 85dBA which is a significant reduction over the RBS-D requirement of 90dBA. Achieving this will result in significant design compromises that will effect performance. Is it the USCG's intent that RBS-III be quieter than the RBS-D?

Yes, the intent of RB-S III is to be consistent with RB-S II which was 85 dBA, which is quieter than the RB-S Demo boat requirement.

4 079-1.1.1 For the application of Annex F, Table F.3, and Annex G, Table G.2, are "air chambers" to be considered "floatation elements" and subject to the restriction of the statement "Only low-density materials shall be used to meet the floatation elements..."? If so, the RBS-III Specifications discourage watertight subdivision of the hull and may result in designs with a single, continuous hull compartment that does not provide optimum safety and resilience in service.

The ISO standard allows for air chambers to be considered flotation elements.

For RB-S III the USCG does not allow air chambers to be considered flotation elements. This is not meant to discourage WT subdivision.

5 100-2.7 No requirement for a hull beaching plate appears in the RBS-III Specification. Is a beaching plate desired, and if so can it be called out as an exception to the restriction on doubler plates so that it could be renewed if damaged without penetrating the watertight envelope of the hull. Can an exception for seat mount bases also be allowed?

The RB-S III Specification does not require a beaching plate. If a beaching plate is proposed it may be a doubler. The Specification will be updated to allow this exception.

An exception for seat mounts will not be allowed.

6 191-1.5.2 This requirement for bags to be installed "above longitudinal members/girders and transverse frames" will severely restrict the volume available for foam installation, and ultimately result in a higher vessel center of gravity and reduced safety and handling. Can it be replaced with a minimum stand-off dimension from shell plating?

Yes, a minimum stand-off of at least one inch may be used. The specification's intent is to prevent a faying surface between the bag and boat structure.

Requirement is being revised to language similar to:

"Bags installed ... above fuel tank(s). Bags can be placed or extend below longitudinal girders and transverse frames provided they have a minimum stand-off from the hull of one inch between the hull and the bag to prevent creation of a faying surface.

Date: September 23, 2026

7 513-2.1 Is it the intent that the outlets described be part of a forced air ventilation system? If so, is that system required to supply untreated outside air, recirculated cabin air, air conditioned air, and/or heated air?

The intent is to, at a minimum, provide each seating location with a fan that can be directed (up/down, left/right) to circulate cabin air. A ducted system that is tied to the heating system and/or outside vents is allowable but not required.

The requirement for Air Conditioning has been removed.

8 625-1.4.3 Is there a minimum size, or standard that can be referenced for the design of the emergency egress openings?

No there is not a minimum size or a referenced standard. The Human Factors Engineering requirements from Section 088-2 should be used to size the openings.

9 625-1.8 Would the USCG reconsider the restriction on vertically opening windows as a means to comply with the firing arc and egress requirements?

No, the restriction on vertically opening windows is not going to be relaxed for forward and side cabin windows. Allowance is being made for windows on the aft bulkhead of the cabin to open vertically

10 N/A Would the Coast Guard consider contracting a design-only award for the RBS-III No.

11 042-1.18, 070-

2.2, 079-1.1, 114-3.1

The requirements changed from the Demonstration boats: Increased full load condition (two additional passengers), LOA in the water is limited to 31 feet and 9 inches, and a guard rail is required for the engines.

Implications: The 31 feet 9 inch on water length restriction and the inclusion of an engine guard to protect outboard limits the available on water length.

The two additional passengers factored into the Passenger crowding assessment of ISO 12217-1 basically increases the static stability requirement.

The beam constraint and new length on water constraint combined with the increased passenger / payload requirement is pushing up against the passenger crowding stability requirement. This is a tight combination of constraints to meet.

Question: Would the USCG consider: 1) redefining length on the water to the welded hull (not counting outboards, engine guard, and forward collar) and/or 2) leaving full load requirement at 4 crew and 6 passengers (not 8).

The length requirement is being revised to language similar to:

"Length (overall) – Shall not exceed 37 feet on the trailer and 32 feet 6 inches in water, ..."

The engine guard requirement is being deleted (taff rail still required)

We are making adjustments to the beam requirement along the lines of:

* The beam requirement is being adjusted to 8 feet 6 inches in the deflated condition if an air bladder is used as part of the fender.

* The air bladder cannot be considered a flotation element.

* Calculations may use the inflated beam dimension.

* If an air bladder is provided an air pump (manual or electric) must be included with the boat outfit.

* The maximum inflated beam shall not exceed 8 feet 10 inches.

The operational need is 8 passengers and 4 crew.

12 441-4.1 Section 441-4.1 requires a wireless BCCS. Is the Government’s intent that all four crew stations operate exclusively wirelessly, or will a hybrid architecture incorporating some wired crew positions or wired backup/fallback capability be needed?

The requirement is 4 wireless stations.

13 441-4.2.1 There is a section that says "Use Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) 256-bit encryption.

Wireless crew communications that meet this requirement do not need to have the wireless function disabled.” Is AES 256 a requirement or can a system that doesn’t have AES 256 be a wired system only? The option to not be AES 256 was a bit confusing to us

Specification Section 402-2.3.1. requires all wireless technology to be disabled unless explicitly authorized by the USCG, Section 441-4.2.1 authorizes wireless for the BCCS based on meeting the AES 256 encryption.

14 441-4.3 For the requirement that the BCCS provide communication over the loud hailer from each station, is the Government’s intent that each BCCS user be capable of selecting and transmitting through the loud hailer directly from the user’s PCU/PTT without operating separate console controls?

Yes.

15 441-4.3 Should the BCCS allow users at various stations to listen to and transmit on all or multiple radios simultaneously?

The BCCS shall allow a user to select and listen or transmit over a selected circuit.

Other users shall be able to select and listen or transmit over other circuits at the same time (simultaneously).

16 N/A Does the Government intend for vessel alarms or warning signals to be provided audibly through the BCCS headsets? If so, which alarms should be interfaced with the BCCS, and should alarms interrupt or override normal intercom and radio audio?

No, there is no intent for the boat's alarms or warning signals to be provided audibly though the BCCS headsets.

The BCCS should not be connected to boat alarms or warning system(s).

17 441-4.6 Section 441-4.6 requires the “system” to be rated to at least IP67. Does this requirement apply to all BCCS components, including headsets, PCU/PTTs, interface units, charging equipment, connectors, and installed electronics, or will equipment exposed to the marine environment like the headsets and PTTs require more substantial environmental testing/durability?

Parts of the system that are exposed to the marine environment, such as headsets and PTTs shall be IP67 or higher. Components that remain in the cabin (fixed) and are protected from exposure do not need to be IP67.

18 N/A Beyond IP67, does the Government intend to establish salt-fog, corrosion, shock, vibration, temperature, or other environmental qualification requirements specifically applicable to the

BCCS?

No. The minimum requirements for the system are in the specification.

19 100-2.6.3 Can the Government clarify the process for KO approval of bent plate structure? If ISO compliant fabrication techniques and bend radii are applied, with bent plate structure be allowed in lieu of extruded or welded flanges?

The use of bent plate is allowed on structure above the deck (e.g., cabin, gunwale, console). The use of bent plate below deck will require approval by the KO. A request for variance may be submitted after award.

20 313-3.1 Some engine manufacturers do not recommend the use of Automatic Charging Relays with their outboards. In the case where the OEM recommends an alternative, will USCG accept a traditional diode-type battery isolation system to meet these requirements?

ACRs are not required. Engine OEM recommended alternatives to ACRs are acceptable.

21 424-1.2.2 Per OEM guidance and our understanding of the RBS III mission, the transducers specified exceed the need for a vessel of this size. Would the USCG entertain a transducer with a smaller form factor which is better suited to the operational areas intended for the RBS III?

No, the transducers identified are part of the Scalable Integrated Navigation System, Generation II. Use of an alternative transducer would require inclusion in the SINS II list of components. A request for variation would be considered following award.

22 233 Will the USCG consider any fuel source other than gasoline for the ouboard engines for RB-

S III?

No.