Table 16 - Allocation of Allowance for Credit Losses (1) (dollar amounts in thousands)
## Table 0 ##
(1) Percentages represent the percentage of each loan and lease category to total loans and leases.
The $4 million, or 1%, increase in the ACL compared with December 31, 2014, was driven by: ?
$16 million, or 48%, increase in the ALLL of the automobile portfolio.
The increase was driven by growth in loan balances, along with the extension of loss emergence periods embedded within the portfolio’s reserve factors.
It was partially offset by the impact of no longer utilizing separate qualitative methods to estimate economic risks inherent in our portfolio.  ?
$12 million, or 4%, increase in the ALLL of the C&I portfolio.
The increase in the allowance for credit losses within the commercial portfolio reflects the impact of select downgrades, including within the Oil & Gas portfolio.
In addition, the extension of the loss emergence periods utilized in establishing the portfolio’s reserve factors contributed to the increase in reserve levels.
Offsetting these increases was the decision to no longer utilize separate qualitative methods to estimate economic risks inherent in our portfolio, as well as improved performance on the Pass Graded portfolio over the past year.  ?
$11 million, or 19%, increase in the AULC driven by both Commercial and Consumer portfolio growth and by risk rating migration within the C&I portfolio which impacted the updated assessment of the unfunded commercial exposure.
Partially offset by: ?
$14 million, or 37%, decline in the ALLL of the other consumer portfolio.
The decline was primarily driven by our assessment of consumer overdraft reserve factors, and the impact of no longer utilizing separate qualitative methods to estimate economic risks inherent in our portfolios.  ?
$13 million, or 13%, decline in the ALLL of the home equity portfolio.
Continued improvement in the residential real estate market led to improved expected loss factors in the portfolio, along with no longer utilizing separate qualitative methods to estimate economic risks inherent in the portfolio.
These reductions were partially offset by the extension of loss emergence periods utilized in the reserve factors for the portfolio.  ?
$6 million, or 12%, decline in the ALLL of the residential mortgage portfolio.
Continued improvement in both the residential real estate market and portfolio delinquency performance led to improved expected loss factors in the portfolio, along with no longer utilizing separate qualitative methods to estimate economic risks inherent in the portfolio lead to the reduction in reserve levels.
These reductions were partially offset by the extension of loss emergence periods utilized in the reserve factors for the portfolio.
Table 28 - Contractual Obligations (1) (dollar amounts in millions)
## Table 1 ##
(1) Amounts do not include associated interest payments.
Operational Risk Operational risk is the risk of loss due to human error; inadequate or failed internal systems and controls, including the use of financial or other quantitative methodologies that may not adequately predict future results; violations of, or noncompliance with, laws, rules, regulations, prescribed practices, or ethical standards; and external influences such as market conditions, fraudulent activities, disasters, and security risks.
We continuously strive to strengthen our system of internal controls to ensure compliance with laws, rules, and regulations, and to improve the oversight of our operational risk.
We actively and continuously monitor cyber-attacks such as attempts related to online deception and loss of sensitive customer data.
We evaluate internal systems, processes and controls to mitigate loss from cyber-attacks and, to date, have not experienced any material losses.
Our objective for managing cyber security risk is to avoid or minimize the impacts of external threat events or other efforts to penetrate our systems.
We work to achieve this objective by hardening networks and systems against attack, and by diligently managing visibility and monitoring controls within our data and communications environment to recognize events and respond before the attacker has the opportunity to plan and execute on its own goals.
To this end we employ a set of defense in-depth strategies, which include efforts to make Huntington less attractive as a target and less vulnerable to threats, while investing in threat analytic capabilities for rapid detection and response.
Potential concerns related to cyber security may be escalated to our board-level Technology Committee, as appropriate.
As a complement to the overall cyber security risk management, we use a number of internal training methods, both formally through mandatory courses and informally through written communications and other updates.
Internal policies and procedures have been implemented to encourage the reporting of potential phishing attacks or other security risks.
We also use third-party services to test the effectiveness of our cyber security risk management framework, and any such third parties are required to comply with our policies regarding information security and confidentiality.
To mitigate operational risks, we have a senior management Operational Risk Committee and a senior management Legal, Regulatory, and Compliance Committee.
The responsibilities of these committees, among other duties, include establishing and maintaining management information systems to monitor material risks and to identify potential concerns, risks, or trends that may have a significant impact and ensuring that recommendations are developed to address the identified issues.
In addition, we have a senior management Model Risk Oversight Committee that is responsible for policies and procedures describing how model risk is evaluated and managed and the application of the governance process to implement these practices throughout the enterprise.
These committees report any significant findings and recommendations to the Risk Management Committee.
Potential concerns may be escalated to our ROC, as appropriate.
The goal of this framework is to implement effective operational risk techniques and strategies; minimize operational, fraud, and legal losses; minimize the impact of inadequately designed models and enhance our overall performance.
Compliance Risk Financial institutions are subject to many laws, rules, and regulations at both the federal and state levels.
In September 2014, for example, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency issued its final rule formalizing its “heightened expectations” supervisory regime for the largest federally chartered depository institutions, including Huntington, to improve risk management and ensure boards can challenge decisions made by management.
These broad-based laws, rules and regulations include, but are not limited to, expectations relating to anti-money laundering, lending limits, client privacy, fair lending, prohibitions against unfair, deceptive or abusive acts or practices, protections for military members as they enter active duty, and community reinvestment.
Additionally, the volume and complexity of recent regulatory changes have increased our overall compliance risk.
As such, we utilize various resources to help ensure expectations are met, including a team of compliance experts dedicated to ensuring our conformance with all applicable laws, rules, and regulations.
Our colleagues receive training for several broad-based laws and regulations including, but not limited to, anti-money laundering and customer privacy.
Additionally, colleagues engaged in lending activities receive training for laws and
will no longer be significant contributors to business operating results, while expenses should also decline significantly reflecting the reduced level of operations.
Operating earnings will primarily consist of retail forestland and real estate sales of remaining acreage.
Specialty Businesses and Other The Specialty Businesses and Other segment includes the results of the Arizona Chemical business and certain divested businesses whose results are included in this segment for periods prior to their sale or closure.
This segment’s 2006 net sales increased 2% from 2005, but declined 17% from 2004.
Operating profits in 2006 were up substantially from both 2005 and 2004.
The decline in sales compared with 2004 principally reflects declining contributions from businesses sold or closed.
## Table 2 ##
ARIZONA CHEMICAL sales were $769 million in 2006, compared with $692 million in 2005 and $672 million in 2004.
Sales volumes declined in 2006 compared with 2005, but average sales price realizations in 2006 were higher in both the United States and Europe.
Operating earnings in 2006 were significantly higher than in 2005 and more than 49% higher than in 2004.
The increase over 2005 reflects the impact of the higher average sales price realizations and lower manufacturing costs, partially offset by higher prices for crude tall oil (CTO).
Earnings for 2005 also included a $13 million charge related to a plant shutdown in Norway.
Other businesses in this operating segment include operations that have been sold, closed or held for sale, primarily the Polyrey business in France and, in prior years, the European Distribution business.
Sales for these businesses were approximately $166 million in 2006, compared with $223 million in 2005 and $448 million in 2004.
In December 2006, the Company entered into a definitive agreement to sell the Arizona Chemical business, expected to close in the first quarter of 2007.
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES Overview A major factor in International Paper’s liquidity and capital resource planning is its generation of operating cash flow, which is highly sensitive to changes in the pricing and demand for our major products.
While changes in key cash operating costs, such as energy and raw material costs, do have an effect on operating cash generation, we believe that our strong focus on cost controls has improved our cash flow generation over an operating cycle.
As part of the continuing focus on improving our return on investment, we have focused our capital spending on improving our key paper and packaging businesses both globally and in North America.
Spending levels have been kept below the level of depreciation and amortization charges for each of the last three years, and we anticipate spending will again be slightly below depreciation and amortization in 2007.  Financing activities in 2006 have been focused on the Transformation Plan objective of strengthening the balance sheet through repayment of debt, resulting in a net reduction in 2006 of $5.2 billion following a $1.7 billion net reduction in 2005.
Additionally, we made a $1.0 billion voluntary cash contribution to our U. S.  qualified pension plan in December 2006 to begin satisfying projected long-term funding requirements and to lower future pension expense.
Our liquidity position continues to be strong, with approximately $3.0 billion of committed liquidity to cover future short-term cash flow requirements not met by operating cash flows.
Management believes it is important for International Paper to maintain an investment-grade credit rating to facilitate access to capital markets on favorable terms.
At December 31, 2006, the Company held long-term credit ratings of BBB (stable outlook) and Baa3 (stable outlook) from Standard & Poor’s and Moody’s Investor Services, respectively.
Cash Provided by Operations Cash provided by continuing operations totaled $1.0 billion for 2006, compared with $1.2 billion for 2005 and $1.7 billion in 2004.
The 2006 amount is net of a $1.0 billion voluntary cash pension plan contribution made in the fourth quarter of 2006.
The major components of cash provided by continuing operations are earnings from continuing operations

<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="10">At December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">2015</td><td colspan="2">2014</td><td colspan="2">2013</td><td colspan="2">2012</td><td colspan="2">2011</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Commercial and industrial</td><td>$298,746</td><td>41%</td><td>$286,995</td><td>40%</td><td>$265,801</td><td>41%</td><td>$241,051</td><td>42%</td><td>$275,367</td><td>38%</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial real estate</td><td>100,007</td><td>10</td><td>102,839</td><td>11</td><td>162,557</td><td>11</td><td>285,369</td><td>14</td><td>388,706</td><td>14</td></tr><tr><td>Total commercial</td><td>398,753</td><td>51</td><td>389,834</td><td>51</td><td>428,358</td><td>52</td><td>526,420</td><td>56</td><td>664,073</td><td>52</td></tr><tr><td>Consumer:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Automobile</td><td>49,504</td><td>19</td><td>33,466</td><td>18</td><td>31,053</td><td>15</td><td>34,979</td><td>11</td><td>38,282</td><td>11</td></tr><tr><td>Home equity</td><td>83,671</td><td>17</td><td>96,413</td><td>18</td><td>111,131</td><td>19</td><td>118,764</td><td>20</td><td>143,873</td><td>21</td></tr><tr><td>Residential mortgage</td><td>41,646</td><td>12</td><td>47,211</td><td>12</td><td>39,577</td><td>12</td><td>61,658</td><td>12</td><td>87,194</td><td>13</td></tr><tr><td>Other loans</td><td>24,269</td><td>1</td><td>38,272</td><td>1</td><td>37,751</td><td>2</td><td>27,254</td><td>1</td><td>31,406</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Total consumer</td><td>199,090</td><td>49</td><td>215,362</td><td>49</td><td>219,512</td><td>48</td><td>242,655</td><td>44</td><td>300,755</td><td>48</td></tr><tr><td>Total allowance for loan and lease losses</td><td>597,843</td><td>100%</td><td>605,196</td><td>100%</td><td>647,870</td><td>100%</td><td>769,075</td><td>100%</td><td>964,828</td><td>100%</td></tr><tr><td>Allowance for unfunded loan commitments</td><td>72,081</td><td></td><td>60,806</td><td></td><td>62,899</td><td></td><td>40,651</td><td></td><td>48,456</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Total allowance for credit losses</td><td>$669,924</td><td></td><td>$666,002</td><td></td><td>$710,769</td><td></td><td>$809,726</td><td></td><td>$1,013,284</td><td></td></tr><tr><td colspan="11">Total allowance for loan and leases losses as % of:</td></tr><tr><td>Total loans and leases</td><td></td><td>1.19%</td><td></td><td>1.27%</td><td></td><td>1.50%</td><td></td><td>1.89%</td><td></td><td>2.48%</td></tr><tr><td>Nonaccrual loans and leases</td><td></td><td>161</td><td></td><td>202</td><td></td><td>201</td><td></td><td>189</td><td></td><td>178</td></tr><tr><td>Nonperforming assets</td><td></td><td>150</td><td></td><td>179</td><td></td><td>184</td><td></td><td>173</td><td></td><td>163</td></tr><tr><td colspan="11">Total allowance for credit losses as % of:</td></tr><tr><td>Total loans and leases</td><td></td><td>1.33%</td><td></td><td>1.40%</td><td></td><td>1.65%</td><td></td><td>1.99%</td><td></td><td>2.60%</td></tr><tr><td>Nonaccrual loans and leases</td><td></td><td>180</td><td></td><td>222</td><td></td><td>221</td><td></td><td>199</td><td></td><td>187</td></tr><tr><td>Nonperforming assets</td><td></td><td>168</td><td></td><td>197</td><td></td><td>202</td><td></td><td>182</td><td></td><td>172</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>(dollar amounts in millions)</td><td colspan="5">At December 31, 2015</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>One Yearor Less</td><td>1 to 3Years</td><td>3 to 5Years</td><td>More than5 Years</td><td>Total</td></tr><tr><td>Deposits without a stated maturity</td><td>$48,573</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td><td>$48,573</td></tr><tr><td>Certificates of deposit and other time deposits</td><td>5,565</td><td>933</td><td>161</td><td>63</td><td>6,722</td></tr><tr><td>Short-term borrowings</td><td>615</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>615</td></tr><tr><td>Long-term debt</td><td>1,097</td><td>3,619</td><td>1,973</td><td>333</td><td>7,022</td></tr><tr><td>Operating lease obligations</td><td>53</td><td>95</td><td>82</td><td>191</td><td>421</td></tr><tr><td>Purchase commitments</td><td>80</td><td>73</td><td>17</td><td>6</td><td>176</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td><i>In millions</i></td><td>2006</td><td>2005</td><td>2004</td></tr><tr><td>Sales</td><td>$935</td><td>$915</td><td>$1,120</td></tr><tr><td>Operating Profit</td><td>$61</td><td>$4</td><td>$38</td></tr></table>

Question: in 2006 what percentage of specialty businesses sales are from arizona chemical sales?
Answer: 0.82246