Whenever National Fuel Gas Distribution Corp. decides it is time to raise its rates, it offers customers a series of tips on how to cut their natural gas costs.

The suggestions are often common sense: turn down your thermostat, invest in an energy-efficient furnace, make sure your home is properly insulated.

These steps, the company contends, are designed to help you save money.

If you use less gas, the reasoning goes, your bank account will be thicker after you write the check to pay for your winter heat.

But according to Sunday's story by Erie Times-News business editor Doug Oathout, www.goerie.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060618/FRONTPAGE/606180361
it turns out those cost-saving suggestions might be for naught.

National Fuel thinks it is entitled to more of your money -- even if you've been huddling under blankets or have invested heavily in an energy-efficient furnace.

The Buffalo-based utility has asked the state Public Utility Commission for the ability to add a surcharge to your bill if usage falls below a certain level.

Get it? If you use less gas, we'll charge you more.

The company says the surcharge would be necessary to keep keep it "whole" if customers use less. If people continue to use less gas, it claims it will not be able to turn as nice of a profit in the future.

National Fuel's financial performance, however, would suggest otherwise.

The average customer used 130,000 cubic feet of gas per year back in 1995. Since then, usage has gone down. It was down to 115,000 cubic feet in January 2004 and had fallen to 99,649 by January of this year.

That's clearly a big drop.

But it hasn't slowed down National Fuel's performance on Wall Street.

National Fuel has a healthy operating margin of 15.16 percent. Its annual revenues are about $2.3 billion annually. Its annual gross profit is $559 million.

According to Yahoo Finance, its stock price has increased by nearly 21 percent during the past year. And, if you read its message boards, it has a happy group of shareholders who continue to see their dividend payments rise.

Oh, and its top two executives each earned a base salary in excess of $800,000 during the most recent fiscal year -- a figure that doesn't include the millions in company stock they've accumulated.

This company is not hurting.

But it wants to put the hurt on you -- again.