Sole Source Justification Form

Version 7.01 Page 1 of 6

Bulletin Reference Number 26-448DOIT-TELEC-B-51674

Requesting Agency/University DoIT

Sole Source Justification Form - Part I Section I - General Information

Department/Bureau/Section: ICN-WAN Backbone Services - Network Services - DOIT

Need Identified Date: Mar 1, 2026 Supply/Service Need By Date: Apr 30, 2026

Project Title: i3 Broadband Scott Hall IRU Dark Fiber - No Cost

Vendor: i3 Broadband

Provide a description of the supplies or services required:

Network Backbone services supporting the Champaign/Kankakee/Chicago area POP Sites and ILA sites. This allows for backbone connectivity related to POP to POP and POP to ILA communications. This supports ALL network services to and through the Champaign and Chicago Illinois area.

Value: Actual Value of Initial Term, this Change Order or Amendment: 461,319.81

Will this Sole Source amend a Professional or Artistic Services contract? Yes No

*Sole Source may not be used for amendments for Professional or Artistic Services if the amendment would increase the value by more than 5% of the initial award or extend the term by more than 60 days.

Type: New Sole Economically Feasible Source

Section II - Proposed Term

One-Time Purchase Term Contract

Estimated Contract Begin Date: 4/30/2026

Estimated Contract End Date: 7/14/2034

Number of Potential Renewals: 0

Length of Each Renewal in Months: 0

Total Value of All Renewals: 0

If a Term Contract, does the term, including renewals, exceed 12 months? Yes No

If yes, provide a detailed justification including any economic benefit received for agreeing to a multi-year term:

The Agency is entering into a reciprocal No Cost agreement with i3 Broadband.

Section III - Funding Source Select the type of funding to be used (Check all that apply): State Appropriate Funds Federal Funds Other (Explain):

Section IV - Sole Source Justification

This purchase is economically only available from a single source primarily because it is: (If "Other" explain in one sentence)

Compatibility of Equipment, Accessories, Replacement Parts or Service

Are there secondary justification(s) for this sole source? Yes No

Another justification that this purchase is only available from a sole source is because it is:

This fiber is the only fiber available on the path as described above, this path is also currently operational, representing a significant inves

Version 7.01 Page 2 of 6

Bulletin Reference Number 26-448DOIT-TELEC-B-51674

Requesting Agency/University DoIT

Another justification that this purchase is only available from a sole source is because it is:

Section V - Purchase History

Has the Agency or University Purchased these supplies or services in the past? Yes No

Term Term From Term To Value Description Contract Number Type

1 Jul 15, 2014 Jul 14, 2024 515,520 UC2B/IGA /IRU Sole Source

If more than 10, or if other comments, explain:

Section VI - Business Rationale

1. Provide a detailed explanation of the need for the supplies or services:

This allows for backbone connectivity related to POP to POP and POP to ILA communications. This supports ALL network services to and through the Chicago and Champaign Illinois area.

Version 7.01 Page 3 of 6

Bulletin Reference Number 26-448DOIT-TELEC-B-51674

Requesting Agency/University DoIT

2. Provide a list and describe in detail the specifications required to satisfy the need:

The Illinois Department of Innovation and Technology (DoIT), Networks Division, has a critical need for the fiber route services provided by i3 Broadband to ensure continued, reliable network connectivity for State operations and affiliated institutions. These fiber routes are essential for maintaining high-speed, redundant, and secure data transport across key locations, including Champaign/Kankakee/ Chicago area POP Sites and ILA sites. The services are required to support government communications infrastructure, facilitate data exchange between State offices.

Pricing Table. Includes reference number from reciprocal contract to determine "cost difference".

Reciprocal Contract Value (DoIT) Description Mile Maintenance #Fiber Strand Mile Fiber Maintenance Annual Maintenance Term Cost I-57 & Olympian 136.50 NA 2 273.00 NA NA NA to Cermak I-57 & Bradley 139.65 139.65 2 279.30 $398.00 $55,580.70 $461,319.81 to Cermak Total $55,580.70 $461,319.81

Contract Value (i3 Broadband - @Scott Hall) Description Mile Maintenance #Fiber Strand Mile Maintenance Annual Maintenance Term Cost I-57 North Ring #1 17.38 17.38 4 69.52 $459.47 $7,985.59 $66,280.39 I-57 & Olympian I-74 West Ring #1 17.38 NA 4 69.52 NA NA NA I-57 & Olympian I-72 West Ring #2 17.59 17.59 4 70.36 $459.47 $8,082.08 $67,081.24 I-57 & Bradley I-57 South Ring #2 17.59 NA 4 70.36 NA NA NA I-57 & Bradley I-74 East Ring #6 15.98 15.98 4 63.92 $459.47 $7,342.33 $60,941.34 Rt 150 & High Cross Total $23,410.00 $194,302.97

Ancillary Services Other Services Detail Quantity Monthly Cost Annual Cost Term Cost Layer Two Transport to Three Locations 3 $240.00 $8,640.00 $69.120.00 (313 Mattis-HCFS), SOS on Bradley, IDOT on Market Street)

Reciprocal Agreement Cost: $55,580.70 i3 Broadband Agreement Cost: $23,410.00 Cost Difference - i3 Broadband Pays $32,170.70

3. Provide detail explaining the justification selected in Section IV to explain why the requested supplies or services are the only ones available that can satisfy the agency or university requirements?

This fiber is the only fiber available on the path as described above. Staff came to this determination based on building review, area review and consulted with fiber operator. As well as in current contract with vendor for other IRU locations, would like all contracts with said vendor to end together.

Version 7.01 Page 4 of 6

Bulletin Reference Number 26-448DOIT-TELEC-B-51674

Requesting Agency/University DoIT

4. What are the unique features of the supplies or services that are not available in any other product or by any other vendor? Provide specific quantifiable factors/qualifications:

Fiber infrastructure is existing infrastructure that the state can use to satisfy its data / connectivity needs to Agencies, K12 and Higher Education. The connection points required include the I-57 & Olympia to 350 E Cermak in Chicago. Creating a new path would require

50.95 miles of fiber at a value of $6,114,000.00 of infrastructure/fiber optic investments based on average cost $120K per mile for building in a densely populated urban environment.

5. Has the Agency or University considered alternative supplies or services to satisfy their need? Yes No

5a. If yes, name the alternative vendors whose supplies or services were evaluated:

In review of fiber routes in Illinois, the Agency has determined that are no vendors available with the same footprint.

5b. If yes, what were the alternatives for each vendor and why were they unacceptable? Be specific with regard to features, characteristics, requirements, capabilities and compatibility:

In review of fiber routes in Illinois, the Agency has determined that are no vendors available with the same footprint.

5c. Explain how the market evaluation was conducted?

*This evaluation is to determine available options within a market. If the evaluation is to determine quality or best suited option, this is not the appropriate source selection. Under no circumstances shall the evaluation consist of testing alternative options. These activities must be conducted in a competitive transparent environment (i.e. IFB or RFP).

Based on current and past contracts with the State and quotes for similar services (IRU), the Agency determined there are no vendors with the same footprint. The Staff came to this determination based on building review, area review and consulted with fiber operator as well as in current contract with vendor for other IRU locations.

6. Are there resellers or distributors?

Yes No N/A

7. What efforts were made to get the best possible price (i.e. did the agency/university negotiate) and how did you determine the price for this purchase is considered fair and reasonable?

Agency used vendors public pricing model including historic pricing in previous and current IRU's, which also matches the State's model for IRU services. The Agency has negotiated a No Cost IRU arrangement with i3 Broadband which resulted in the State saving $181,646.94.

8. Will this purchase obligate the State to this vendor for future purchases such as maintenance, licensing or continuing need?

Yes No

9. What will be the financial or other impact to the State if this sole source is not approved and a competitive bid is required?

The most significant impact would be a loss of service in the Champaign/Kankakee/Chicago area POP Sites and ILA sites which would affect the Network services across the State. If the Agency was required to competitively bid this procurement it would cost the State $869,006.94 as opposed to the No Cost arrangement contained herein.

10. Is there any additional information you would like to add to justify this sole source?

Currently in a 20-year term contract with vendor, and would like to continue this contract with said vendor in order for all contracts to end at the same time as well as maintain the No Cost arrangement within this agreement.

Version 7.01 Page 5 of 6

Bulletin Reference Number 26-448DOIT-TELEC-B-51674

Requesting Agency/University DoIT

Section VII

Requesting Department Representative

Requesting Department Signature Required

I know and understand the contents of this Sole Source Justification and attest that all statements are true and correct and the fairness and reasonableness of the price was adequately confirmed.

Date Apr 7, 2026

Printed Name Patrick Kelleher E-mail Address patrick.kelleher@illinois.gov

Phone Number 217-557-7303

State Agency Bureau/Division Head or University Purchasing Director Approval and Signature Required

I know and understand the contents of this Sole Source Justification and attest that all statements are true and correct and the fairness and reasonableness of the price was adequately confirmed. (All prior form fields will lock once this e-signature is completed)

E-mail Address christopher.brinkmeyer@illinois.gov

Phone Number 217-524-7057 Date Apr 7, 2026

Printed Name Chris Brinkmeyer

Agency Bureau/Division Head or University Purchasing Director and Not a Designee

SPO Approval and Signature Required

I have reviewed and understand the contents of this Sole Source Justification and agree with the State Agency or University determination.

I have reviewed and understand the contents of this Sole Source Justification and do not agree with the State Agency or University determination. As a result, the State Agency or University must explore other sourcing methods to satisfy their need.

State Purchasing Officer Signature Phone Number 217-720-6643 Date Apr 8, 2026

Printed Name David Papp E-mail Address David.Papp@Illinois.gov

Version 7.01 Page 6 of 6

Bulletin Reference Number 26-448DOIT-TELEC-B-51674

Requesting Agency/University DoIT

Sole Source Justification Form - Part II Section I - General Information

Project Title i3 Broadband Scott Hall IRU Dark Fiber - No Cost

Vendor i3 Broadband

Initial Date of Procurement Bulletin Posting Apr 8, 2026

Was a Sole Source hearing held per 30 ILCS 500/20-25?

Yes - Complete Section II and III below (Section II will only be visible when this option is selected)

No - Section II not required, go to Section III below Section III - CPO Approval and Signature Required

Based on my review, I authorize the Agency/University to proceed in accordance with the published Notice referenced above.

Based upon my review, I authorize the Agency/University to proceed with the following Changes.

Based on my review, the Agency/University is not authorized to proceed with this sole source as presented and my recommendation is that it be cancelled.

Other

CPO Signature CPO Phone 217-622-1857

Printed Name Ellen H. Daley Date Apr 22, 2026

CPO E-mail Ellen.H.Daley@illinois.gov

Version 7.01 Page of Sole Source Justification Form - Part I Section I - General Information Will this Sole Source amend a Professional or Artistic Services contract?

If yes, what was the original contract value?

*Sole Source may not be used for amendments for Professional or Artistic Services if the amendment would increase the value by more than 5% of the initial award or extend the term by more than 60 days.

Section II - Proposed Term If a Term Contract, does the term, including renewals, exceed 12 months?

If yes, provide a detailed justification including any economic benefit received for agreeing to a multi-year term:

Section III - Funding Source Select the type of funding to be used (Check all that apply):

Section IV - Sole Source Justification Are there secondary justification(s) for this sole source?

Section V - Purchase History Has the Agency or University Purchased these supplies or services in the past?

Term Term From Term To Value Description Contract Number Type Section VI - Business Rationale

1. Provide a detailed explanation of the need for the supplies or services:

2. Provide a list and describe in detail the specifications required to satisfy the need:

3. Provide detail explaining the justification selected in Section IV to explain why the requested supplies or services are the only ones available that can satisfy the agency or university requirements?

4. What are the unique features of the supplies or services that are not available in any other product or by any other vendor? Provide specific quantifiable factors/qualifications:

5. Has the Agency or University considered alternative supplies or services to satisfy their need?

5a. If yes, name the alternative vendors whose supplies or services were evaluated:

5b. If yes, what were the alternatives for each vendor and why were they unacceptable? Be specific with regard to features, characteristics, requirements, capabilities and compatibility:

5c. Explain how the market evaluation was conducted?

*This evaluation is to determine available options within a market. If the evaluation is to determine quality or best suited option, this is not the appropriate source selection. Under no circumstances shall the evaluation consist of testing alternative options. These activities must be conducted in a competitive transparent environment (i.e. IFB or RFP).

5a. If no, why weren't alternatives evaluated?

6. Are there resellers or distributors?

7. What efforts were made to get the best possible price (i.e. did the agency/university negotiate) and how did you determine the price for this purchase is considered fair and reasonable?

8. Will this purchase obligate the State to this vendor for future purchases such as maintenance, licensing or continuing need?

8a. If yes, please provide details regarding future obligations and/or needs:

9. What will be the financial or other impact to the State if this sole source is not approved and a competitive bid is required?

10. Is there any additional information you would like to add to justify this sole source?

Section VII Requesting Department Signature Required I know and understand the contents of this Sole Source Justification and attest that all statements are true and correct and the fairness and reasonableness of the price was adequately confirmed.

State Agency Bureau/Division Head or University Purchasing Director Approval and Signature Required I know and understand the contents of this Sole Source Justification and attest that all statements are true and correct and the fairness and reasonableness of the price was adequately confirmed. (All prior form fields will lock once this e-signature is completed) SPO Approval and Signature Required Sole Source Justification Form - Part II Section I - General Information Was a Sole Source hearing held per 30 ILCS 500/20-25?

Section II - Sole Source Hearing Details The State posted to the Illinois Procurement Bulletin a description of the State's need, the justification for the sole source decision, and information regarding the opportunity to submit comments and testify at a public hearing. Notice of the hearing was also posted outside of the hearing room 48 hours prior to the hearing.

The public hearing was conducted for the purpose of receiving testimony regarding the sole source determination. The Hearing Officer recommends the following:

The following relevant documents are attached:

Section III - CPO Approval and Signature Required 9.0.0.2.20101008.1.734229 Ellen.H.Daley@illinois.gov

Pricing Table. Includes reference number from reciprocal contract to determine "cost difference".

Reciprocal Contract Value (DoIT) Description Mile Maintenance #Fiber Strand Mile Fiber Maintenance Annual Maintenance Term Cost I-57 & Olympian 136.50 NA 2 273.00 NA NA NA to Cermak I-57 & Bradley 139.65 139.65 2 279.30 $398.00 $55,580.70 $461,319.81 to Cermak Total $55,580.70 $461,319.81

Contract Value (i3 Broadband - @Scott Hall) Description Mile Maintenance #Fiber Strand Mile Maintenance Annual Maintenance Term Cost I-57 North Ring #1 17.38 17.38 4 69.52 $459.47 $7,985.59 $66,280.39 I-57 & Olympian I-74 West Ring #1 17.38 NA 4 69.52 NA NA NA I-57 & Olympian I-72 West Ring #2 17.59 17.59 4 70.36 $459.47 $8,082.08 $67,081.24 I-57 & Bradley I-57 South Ring #2 17.59 NA 4 70.36 NA NA NA I-57 & Bradley I-74 East Ring #6 15.98 15.98 4 63.92 $459.47 $7,342.33 $60,941.34 Rt 150 & High Cross Total $23,410.00 $194,302.97

Ancillary Services Other Services Detail Quantity Monthly Cost Annual Cost Term Cost Layer Two Transport to Three Locations 3 $240.00 $8,640.00 $69.120.00 (313 Mattis-HCFS), SOS on Bradley, IDOT on Market Street)

Reciprocal Agreement Cost: $55,580.70 i3 Broadband Agreement Cost: $23,410.00 Cost Difference - i3 Broadband Pays $32,170.70