DT Midstream Q1 2026 Demand Signals for Power and LNG Pipelines

Q1 2026 market demand signals for power-generation- and LNG-driven pipeline needs (DT Midstream, DTM)

1) Power-generation demand signals (Midwest/Northeast)

DTM’s Q1 2026 commentary indicates strengthening power-generation fundamentals in the Midwest and Northeast, tied to data centers and other large load customers and translating into more rapid conversion of opportunities into signed load. Specifically, management said power demand fundamentals “continue to strengthen, driven by data centers and other large load customers,” and that utilities are converting opportunities into signed load “more quickly than previously expected,” with “multiple gigawatts of contracted demand now backed by binding agreements and capital plans” that increase projected peak load through the end of the decade. ¹

DTM also linked this load growth to pipeline commercial activity in its footprint, noting that the response to recent open seasons on Midwestern and Vector pipelines supports these fundamentals. ¹

Concrete Q1 2026 demand/backlog signals via oversubscribed expansion activity

• Midwestern Pipeline open season (beginning of April): DTM reported a nonbinding open season for both northbound and southbound expansions to increase capacity by up to 1.5 Bcf/day, and stated it was oversubscribed. ²
• Vector Pipeline open season (2030 expansion): DTM reported a nonbinding open season to increase westbound capacity into Chicago by 300–500 MMcf/day, also stating it received very strong customer interest and was oversubscribed. ²

These oversubscription outcomes are management’s stated market signal for strong demand depth in the relevant corridors. ² In a separate discussion, management also described an oversubscription as a “very strong demand signal,” referencing an expansion where the existing system capacity is effectively 1.5 Bcf/day, and the fact of oversubscription “is just a strong indication of the depth of the demand growth.” ³

“Backlog” implication (what is explicitly supported in the excerpts) The excerpts do not provide a single numeric “backlog level” for pipelines in Q1 2026 that is explicitly labeled as “backlog” (e.g., total contracted backlog dollars, Bcf/day of signed capacity, or a table of backlog by segment). ^{4352678910111211314151617181920}

However, they do provide backlog-relevant evidence of (a) signed/contracted load vs (b) pre-FID/open-season interest, including:

• recontracted volumes and term extensions on an existing system (Midwestern), which is a form of contracted backlog extension: DTM said it “recently recontracted approximately 30% of the system’s capacity with term extensions ranging from 5 to 25 years.” ²
• progression from nonbinding open seasons toward binding commitments: DTM said its “next steps” for Midwestern and Vector are to “optimize the pipeline and facility design based on the customer requests and then to work with our customers to reach binding commitments.” ²

So, while numeric backlog levels are not disclosed in the excerpts, the evidence strongly suggests that Q1 2026 demand signals are converting into commercial actions that increase the probability of binding, buildable commitments, i.e., backlog growth in practical terms. ²

---

2) LNG-export demand signals (U.S. LNG / Haynesville / LEAP)

DTM explicitly tied Q1 2026 market discussions to U.S. LNG export reliability, arguing that constrained Middle East LNG volumes underscore the value of U.S. supply. Management said “curtailed and constrained LNG volumes” underscored “the value of U.S. LNG as a stable and dependable supply source,” and that DTM believes this will “favor increased LNG exports from the U.S. Gulf Coast” and “create additional expansion opportunities for U.S.-based supply.” ⁴

Operational utilization as a demand signal DTM stated its LEAP pipeline is “currently running full at its design capacity of 2.1 Bcf per day” and “has the ability to expand to 4 Bcf per day.” ⁴ Running “full” at design conditions is a direct, quantitative demand/throughput signal supporting the need for incremental takeaway/expansion for export-driven flows. ⁴

Near-term commercial dialogue and LNG-linked development timing DTM described active, ongoing commercial discussions tied to LNG development:

• Management said there is “a lot of activity going on around that right now, a lot of conversations,” and that geopolitical issues plus reliance on North American LNG supply are a “tailwind” that should drive additional LNG development “FID sooner than later.” ⁷
• Regarding explicit LNG customer conversations and timing, DTM indicated that “there’s a lot of activity” and “a lot of conversations,” consistent with the idea that commercial discussions are underway before facility FID. ⁷

Backlog implication for LNG-driven pipeline expansion As with power-generation, the excerpts do not provide a numeric LNG backlog (signed contract volumes in Bcf/day or dollars) in a dedicated “backlog level” metric. ^{4352678910111211314151617181920} But they do provide backlog-relevant indicators:

• System-level capacity status (LEAP at 2.1 Bcf/day full) suggesting that additional LNG expansion would need to be contracted and built to relieve constraints. ⁴
• Explicit mention of FID-linked expansion timing in the power-to-LNG corridor context is present for at least one pipeline project: DTM stated a pipeline project is “subject to a customer reaching FID in the power plant” with expected lateral in-service date “in the first half of 2028.” ² While that sentence is power-plant focused, it shows how DTM frames backlog conversion as depending on customer FID, which is also the gating event referenced in LNG conversations. ²⁷

---

Summary: “current demand signals” vs “backlog levels” in Q1 2026 (based strictly on the excerpts)

Demand signals (clear and quantified where stated)

1. Power generation: Midwest/Northeast power demand strengthening from data centers and large load, with binding agreements and capital plans increasing peak load through end of decade. ¹
2. Pipeline market confirmation via open seasons:
   • Midwestern expansions up to 1.5 Bcf/day were oversubscribed. ²
   • Vector westbound expansion 300–500 MMcf/day drew very strong interest and was oversubscribed. ²
3. LNG exports: U.S. LNG seen as more valuable given constrained Middle East LNG volumes; DTM expects this favors increased U.S. Gulf Coast LNG exports and expansion opportunities. ⁴
4. Throughput/constraint signal for LNG corridor: LEAP running full at 2.1 Bcf/day design capacity, with expansion capability to 4 Bcf/day. ⁴
5. Commercial dialogue: management described active LNG-related conversations and suggested LNG development FID could occur “sooner than later” due to geopolitical tailwinds and the reliance on North American LNG. ⁷

Backlog levels (what is and isn’t explicitly provided)

• Explicit numeric backlog totals are not disclosed in the provided excerpts. ^{4352678910111211314151617181920}
• What is provided that relates to backlog/contracted demand:
  • A contracted volume indicator: Midwestern recontracted ~30% of system capacity with term extensions 5–25 years. ²
  • Forward demand pipeline projects progressing via oversubscribed open seasons, moving toward binding commitments (i.e., backlog formation steps), with timing and design work described. ²
  • Leverage of pipeline constraints (LEAP running full) indicating the need for incremental throughput—an operating “pressure” that typically underpins backlog growth but is not presented as a backlog number. ⁴

Bottom line: In Q1 2026, DTM’s excerpts show strong, explicit demand signals for both power-generation-driven pipeline capacity (Midwest/Northeast) and LNG-export-driven capacity (Haynesville/LEAP and Gulf connectivity), evidenced by oversubscribed open seasons and full utilization at design capacity. ⁴² However, they do not supply a specific, numeric “backlog level” for these pipelines in Q1 2026 within the provided excerpt set. ^{4352678910111211314151617181920}