Illinois research coverage.

Source references: IL-S0001, IL-S0002

• The report does not name the single withdrawn or denied applicant, so that lifecycle record could not be turned into a candidate.
• The report gives municipalities only, not street addresses or parcels, except in the five 2025 amendments.
• Tenant exemption certificates (91 issued) are counted but not itemised, so tenants are invisible.
• Earlier annual reports (2022-2024) were not opened, so entities that left the programme between reports were not checked.

Source references: IL-S0003, IL-S0004

• Individual ComEd large-load customer studies and applications are not public in the documents read, so no project-level utility request megawatt figure was obtained for any Illinois candidate.
• Ameren Illinois large-load filings were not searched.
• The e-Docket system was not searched item by item; only the consolidated proposed order was read.

Source references: IL-S0005, IL-S0006, IL-S0007, IL-S0008, IL-S0009, IL-S0010, IL-S0011, IL-S0012, IL-S0013

• The EJ notification letter index renders through JavaScript, so the letter list could not be enumerated; documents were found only through targeted searches and the sweep is not systematic.
• Only permits in environmental justice areas of concern generate these letters, so data centres outside such areas are systematically missing from this family.
• No water withdrawal, discharge or stormwater construction permit notices were searched.
• No permits were found or searched for the Channahon, Joliet, DeKalb, Yorkville, Grayslake or Sangamon County sites.

Source references: IL-S0014, IL-S0015, IL-S0016, IL-S0017, IL-S0019

• City of Joliet returned HTTP 403 on both attempts, so the Joliet Technology Center annexation is carried as a dataset-only lead.
• cityofdekalb.com timed out and then refused connections, so the DeKalb development projects list and the Goldframe ordinances were not read.
• elkgrove.org and the Elk Grove Village code library both returned HTTP 403, so no Elk Grove Village ordinance or redevelopment agreement is cited even though the village holds the largest concentration of Illinois data centre incentive recipients.
• No county assessor or GIS parcel portal was queried for any Illinois county, so no parcel identifier appears anywhere in this packet.
• A Channahon search returned only solar business; no Channahon data centre case was located.

Source references: IL-S0018

• The Elk Grove Village announcement returned HTTP 403, so no agreement is cited.
• The Yorkville development and utility agreements were listed on the project page but their documents were not opened.
• No PILOT, enterprise zone or property tax abatement instrument was retrieved for any Illinois site.

Source references: IL-S0020, IL-S0021

• Microsoft, Oracle, Equinix, Digital Realty, CyrusOne, STACK, Stream, QTS, CoreSite, NTT, EdgeConneX, Iron Mountain, Serverfarm and Prime location pages were not opened, so most incentive recipients have no operator-side address.
• Amazon Web Services, Google and Apple Illinois disclosures were not checked at all.
• No colocation operator inventory was built for Chicago.

Source references: IL-S0022

• No unlicensed directory such as Data Center Map, Baxtel or datacenters.com was used, so no cross-reference of colocation facility counts was attempted.
• Roughly three quarters of the Compute Atlas Illinois records, mostly operating Chicago-area colocation facilities, were left as unexamined leads because no primary record could be attached to them within the effort budget.

Source references: IL-S0023

• The single withdrawn or denied Data Center Investment Program application is unnamed in the report and was not traced.
• No systematic search of denied or expired municipal cases was done; only one withdrawal search was run.
• No closed or demolished Illinois data centre was searched for.

Source references: IL-S0024

• No systematic Illinois news sweep was performed; trade coverage of the Chicago colocation market was not reviewed.