Table of Contents Our pension and other postretirement benefit costs and liabilities are calculated using various actuarial assumptions and methodologies.
We use certain assumptions including, but not limited to, the selection of the: (i) discount rate; (ii) expected return on plan assets; (iii) expected health care cost trend rate and (iv) the estimated age of pilot retirement (as discussed below).
These assumptions as of December 31 were:
## Table 0 ##
(1) When establishing our discount rate to measure our obligations, we match high quality corporate bonds available in the marketplace whose cash flows approximate our projected benefit disbursements.
Lowering the discount rate by 50 basis points as of December 31, 2014 would increase our pension and postretirement benefits obligations by approximately $1.4 billion and $58 million, respectively, and increase estimated 2015 pension expense by $7 million and decrease estimated 2015 postretirement benefit expense by $2 million.
(2) The expected return on plan assets is based upon an evaluation of our historical trends and experience taking into account current and expected market conditions and our target asset allocation of 32% longer duration corporate and U. S.  government/agency bonds, 33% U. S.  value stocks, 18% developed international stocks, 9% emerging markets stocks and bonds and 8% alternative (private) investments.
The expected return on plan assets component of our net periodic benefit cost is calculated based on the fair value of plan assets and our target asset allocation.
We monitor our actual asset allocation and believe that our long-term asset allocation will continue to approximate our target allocation.
Our historical annualized ten-year rate of return on plan assets, calculated using a geometric compounding of monthly returns, is approximately 8% as of December 31, 2014.
Lowering the expected long-term rate of return on plan assets by 50 basis points as of December 31, 2014 would increase estimated 2015 pension expense and postretirement benefit expense by approximately $53 million and $1 million, respectively.
(3) The health care cost trend rate is based upon an evaluation of our historical trends and experience taking into account current and expected market conditions.
Increasing the assumed health care cost trend rate by 100 basis points would increase estimated 2015 postretirement benefits expense by $3 million.
During 2014, we revised our mortality assumptions to incorporate the new set of mortality tables issued by the Society ofActuaries, adjusted to reflect our experience and future expectations.
This resulted in an increase in the projected benefit obligation of our pension and retiree medical programs of $682 million and $47 million, respectively.
We also reviewed and revised certain other economic and demographic assumptions including the pension and retiree medical discount rates and health care cost and trend rates.
The net effect of changing these assumptions for the pension and retiree medical plans resulted in an increase of $1.8 billion and a decrease of $64 million, respectively, in the projected benefit obligation at December 31, 2014 primarily due to the decrease in the pension discount rate.
See Note 13 to AAG’s Consolidated Financial Statements in Part II, Item 8A and Note 10 to American’s Consolidated Financial Statements in Part II, Item 8B for additional information regarding our retirement benefits.
to seek an international solution through ICAO and that will allow the U. S.  Secretary of Transportation to prohibit U. S.  airlines from participating in the ETS.
Ultimately, the scope and application of ETS or other emissions trading schemes to our operations, now or in the near future, remains uncertain.
Similarly, within the U. S. , there is an increasing trend toward regulating GHG emissions directly under the CAA.
In response to a 2012 ruling by the U. S.  Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit requiring the EPA to make a final determination on whether aircraft GHG emissions cause or contribute to air pollution, which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare, the EPA announced in September 2014 that it is in the process of making a determination regarding aircraft GHG emissions and anticipates proposing an endangerment finding by May 2015.
If the EPA makes a positive endangerment finding, the EPA is obligated under the CAA to set GHG emission standards for aircraft.
Several states are also considering or have adopted initiatives to regulate emissions of GHGs, primarily through the planned development of GHG emissions inventories and/or regional GHG cap and trade programs.
These regulatory efforts, both internationally and in the U. S.  at the federal and state levels, are still developing, and we cannot yet determine what the final regulatory programs or their impact will be in the U. S. , the EU or in other areas in which we do business.
Depending on the scope of such regulation, certain of our facilities and operations may be subject to additional operating and other permit requirements, potentially resulting in increased operating costs.
The environmental laws to which we are subject include those related to responsibility for potential soil and groundwater contamination.
We are conducting investigation and remediation activities to address soil and groundwater conditions at several sites, including airports and maintenance bases.
We anticipate that the ongoing costs of such activities will not have a material impact on our operations.
In addition, we have been named as a potentially responsible party (PRP) at certain Superfund sites.
Our alleged volumetric contributions at such sites are relatively small in comparison to total contributions of all PRPs; we anticipate that any future payments of costs at such sites will not have a material impact on our operations.
Future Regulatory Developments Future regulatory developments and actions could affect operations and increase operating costs for the airline industry, including our airline subsidiaries.
See Part I, Item 1A.
Risk Factors – “If we are unable to obtain and maintain adequate facilities and infrastructure throughout our system and, at some airports, adequate Slots, we may be unable to operate our existing flight schedule and to expand or change our route network in the future, which may have a material adverse impact on our operations,” “Our business is subject to extensive government regulation, which may result in increases in our costs, disruptions to our operations, limits on our operating flexibility, reductions in the demand for air travel, and competitive disadvantages” and “We are subject to many forms of environmental regulation and may incur substantial costs as a result” for additional information.
Employees and Labor Relations The airline business is labor intensive.
In 2014, salaries, wages and benefits were one of our largest expenses and represented approximately 25% of our operating expenses.
The table below presents our approximate number of active full-time equivalent employees as of December 31, 2014.
## Table 1 ##
ITEM 6.
SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA Selected Consolidated Financial Data of AAG The selected consolidated financial data presented below under the captions “Consolidated Statements of Operations data” and “Consolidated Balance Sheet data” for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013 and 2012 are derived from AAG’s audited consolidated financial statements.
On December 9, 2013, a subsidiary of AMR merged with and into US Airways Group, which survived as a wholly-owned subsidiary of AAG.
Therefore, AAG’s consolidated financial data provided in the tables below includes the results of US Airways Group beginning on December 9, 2013, the effective date of the Merger.
In addition, AAG emerged from bankruptcy on December 9, 2013.
Accordingly, AAG’s consolidated financial information for periods prior to December 9, 2013 is not directly comparable to consolidated financial information for periods subsequent to December 9, 2013.
## Table 2 ##
Reorganization items refer to revenues, expenses (including professional fees), realized gains and losses and provisions for losses that were realized or incurred as a direct result of bankruptcy.
Former holders of AMR common stock as of December 9, 2013, the effective date of the plan of reorganization, may in the future receive additional distributions of AAG common stock dependent upon the ultimate distribution of shares of AAG common stock to holders of disputed claims.
Thus, the shares and related earnings per share calculations prior to December 9, 2013 may change in the future to reflect these distributions.
Substantially all defined benefit pension plans were frozen effective November 1, 2012.
See Note 9 to AAG’s consolidated financial statements in Part II, Item 8A for further information on pension and postretirement benefits.
Warfighter Information Network-Tactical (WIN-T); Command, Control, Battle Management and Communications (C2BMC); and TWIC).
Partially offsetting the decreases were higher net sales of approximately $140 million from QTC, which was acquired early in the fourth quarter of 2011; and about $65 million from increased activity on numerous other programs, primarily federal cyber security programs and PTDS operational support.
IS&GS’ operating profit for 2012 decreased $66 million, or 8%, compared to 2011.
The decrease was attributable to lower operating profit of approximately $50 million due to the favorable impact of the ODIN contract completion in 2011; about $25 million due to an increase in reserves for performance issues related to an international airborne surveillance system in 2012; and approximately $20 million due to lower volume on certain programs (primarily C2BMC and WIN-T).
Partially offsetting the decreases was an increase in operating profit due to higher risk retirements of approximately $15 million from the TWIC program; and about $10 million due to increased activity on numerous other programs, primarily federal cyber security programs and PTDS operational support.
Operating profit for the JTRS program was comparable as a decrease in volume was offset by a decrease in reserves.
Adjustments not related to volume, including net profit booking rate adjustments and other matters described above, were approximately $20 million higher for 2012 compared to 2011.
Backlog Backlog decreased in 2013 compared to 2012 primarily due to lower orders on several programs (such as ERAM and NGI), higher sales on certain programs (the National Science Foundation Antarctic Support and the DISA GSM-O), and declining activities on several smaller programs primarily due to the continued downturn in federal information technology budgets.
Backlog decreased in 2012 compared to 2011 primarily due to the substantial completion of various programs in 2011 (primarily ODIN, U. K.  Census, and JTRS).
Trends We expect IS&GS’ net sales to decline in 2014 in the high single digit percentage range as compared to 2013 primarily due to the continued downturn in federal information technology budgets.
Operating profit is also expected to decline in 2014 in the high single digit percentage range consistent with the expected decline in net sales, resulting in margins that are comparable with 2013 results.
Missiles and Fire Control Our MFC business segment provides air and missile defense systems; tactical missiles and air-to-ground precision strike weapon systems; logistics and other technical services; fire control systems; mission operations support, readiness, engineering support, and integration services; and manned and unmanned ground vehicles.
MFC’s major programs include PAC-3, THAAD, Multiple Launch Rocket System, Hellfire, Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM), Javelin, Apache Fire Control System (Apache), Sniper?, Low Altitude Navigation and Targeting Infrared for Night (LANTIRN?
), and SOF CLSS.
MFC’s operating results included the following (in millions):
## Table 3 ##
2013 compared to 2012 MFC’s net sales for 2013 increased $300 million, or 4%, compared to 2012.
The increase was primarily attributable to higher net sales of approximately $450 million for air and missile defense programs (THAAD and PAC-3) due to increased production volume and deliveries; about $70 million for fire control programs due to net increased deliveries and volume; and approximately $55 million for tactical missile programs due to net increased deliveries.
The increases were partially offset by lower net sales of about $275 million for various technical services programs due to lower volume driven by the continuing impact of defense budget reductions and related competitive pressures.
The increase for fire control programs was primarily attributable to increased deliveries on the Sniper?
and LANTIRN?
programs, increased volume on the SOF CLSS program, partially offset by lower volume on Longbow Fire Control Radar and other programs.
The increase for tactical missile programs was primarily attributable to increased deliveries on JASSM and other programs, partially offset by fewer deliveries on the Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System and Javelin programs.
Insurance.
The following table presents the underwriting results and ratios for the Insurance segment for the periods indicated.
## Table 4 ##
Premiums.
Gross written premiums increased by 16.6% to $1,787.0 million in 2016 compared to $1,532.3 million in 2015.
This increase was primarily driven by expansion of various insurance lines of business, increases in accident and health business and premium from the start-up of the Lloyd’s Syndicate.
Net written premiums increased by 4.5% to $1,385.7 million in 2016 compared to $1,325.9 million in 2015.
The difference between the change in gross written premiums compared to the change in net written premiums is primarily due to the transfer of the crop business to the U. S.  Reinsurance segment as a result of the Heartland sale.
Premiums earned increased 1.9% to $1,291.2 million in 2016 compared to $1,266.7 million in 2015.
The change in premiums earned relative to net written premiums is the result of timing; premiums are earned ratably over the coverage period whereas written premiums are recorded at the initiation of the coverage period.
Gross written premiums increased by 25.8% to $1,532.3 million in 2015 compared to $1,218.4 million in 2014.
This increase was primarily driven by an increase in various lines of business, as the Company looked to expand its insurance operations.
Net written premiums increased by 24.2% to $1,325.9 million in 2015 compared to $1,067.3 million in 2014, which is consistent with the change in gross written premiums.
Premiums earned increased 22.9% to $1,266.7 million in 2015 compared to $1,030.3 million in 2014.
The change in premiums earned relative to net written premiums is the result of timing; premiums are earned ratably over the coverage period whereas written premiums are recorded at the initiation of the coverage period.
TELEFLEX INCORPORATED NOTES?TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) under the terms of the Convertible Notes based on the average market price of its common stock during the period, and included that number in the total diluted shares outstanding for the period. ?
In connection with the issuance of the Convertible Notes, the Company entered into convertible note hedge and warrant agreements.
The convertible note hedge agreements economically reduced the dilutive impact of the Convertible Notes.
However, applicable accounting guidance requires the Company to separately analyze the impact of the warrant agreements on diluted weighted average shares outstanding, without giving effect to the anti-dilutive impact of the convertible note hedge agreements.
The reductions in diluted shares that would have resulted from giving effect to the anti-dilutive impact of the convertible note hedge agreements are 0.3 million, 2.0 million, and 3.3 million for the years ended December?31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively.
The treasury stock method is applied when the exercise price of the warrants is less than the average of the market prices during the period and assumes the proceeds from the exercise of the warrants are used to repurchase shares based on the average stock price during the period.
The exercise price of the warrants is approximately $74.65 per share of common stock.
Shares issuable upon exercise of the warrants that were included in the total diluted shares outstanding were 0.5 million, 1.7 million and 2.7 million for the years ended December?31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively.
See Note 8 for information regarding (i) the reduction in the outstanding principal amount of Convertible Notes as a result of the Company's acquisition of Convertible Notes in exchange for cash and shares of Company common stock and the related reduction in the number of Call Options and warrants outstanding under the convertible note hedge and warrant agreements as a result of the unwinding of the agreements, (ii) the settlement and conversion of the Convertible Notes on the Maturity Date and the related exercise of Call Options under the convertible note hedge agreements and (iii) warrant activity subsequent to the Maturity Date.

<table><tr><td></td><td>2014</td><td> 2013</td></tr><tr><td>Pension discount rate -1</td><td>4.30%</td><td>5.10%</td></tr><tr><td>OPEB discount rate -1</td><td>4.00%</td><td>4.71%</td></tr><tr><td>Expected return on plan assets -2</td><td>8.00%</td><td>8.00%</td></tr><tr><td>Expected health care cost trend rate -3:</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Pre-65 individuals</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Initial</td><td>5.25%</td><td>6.50%</td></tr><tr><td>Ultimate -2023</td><td>4.55%</td><td>4.50%</td></tr><tr><td>Post-65 individuals</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Initial</td><td>5.25%</td><td>6.50%</td></tr><tr><td>Ultimate -2023</td><td>4.55%</td><td>4.50%</td></tr><tr><td>Pilot Retirement Age</td><td>62</td><td>63</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td>American</td><td>US Airways</td><td>Wholly-owned Regional Carriers</td><td>Total</td></tr><tr><td>Pilots</td><td>8,600</td><td>4,400</td><td>3,200</td><td>16,200</td></tr><tr><td>Flight attendants</td><td>15,900</td><td>7,700</td><td>1,800</td><td>25,400</td></tr><tr><td>Maintenance personnel</td><td>10,800</td><td>3,600</td><td>1,700</td><td>16,100</td></tr><tr><td>Fleet service personnel</td><td>8,600</td><td>6,200</td><td>2,500</td><td>17,300</td></tr><tr><td>Passenger service personnel</td><td>9,100</td><td>6,100</td><td>7,300</td><td>22,500</td></tr><tr><td>Administrative and other</td><td>8,600</td><td>4,800</td><td>2,400</td><td>15,800</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>61,600</td><td>32,800</td><td>18,900</td><td>113,300</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">Year Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td> 2016</td><td> 2015</td><td> 2014</td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">(In millions, except share and per share data)</td></tr><tr><td> Consolidated Statements of Operations data:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Total operating revenues</td><td>$40,180</td><td>$40,990</td><td>$42,650</td><td>$26,743</td><td>$24,855</td></tr><tr><td>Total operating expenses</td><td>34,896</td><td>34,786</td><td>38,401</td><td>25,344</td><td>24,707</td></tr><tr><td>Operating income</td><td>5,284</td><td>6,204</td><td>4,249</td><td>1,399</td><td>148</td></tr><tr><td>Reorganization items, net<sup>-1</sup></td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>-2,655</td><td>-2,208</td></tr><tr><td>Net income (loss)</td><td>2,676</td><td>7,610</td><td>2,882</td><td>-1,834</td><td>-1,876</td></tr><tr><td>Earnings (loss) per common share:<sup>(2)</sup></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Basic</td><td>$4.85</td><td>$11.39</td><td>$4.02</td><td>$-6.54</td><td>$-7.52</td></tr><tr><td>Diluted</td><td>4.81</td><td>11.07</td><td>3.93</td><td>-6.54</td><td>-7.52</td></tr><tr><td>Shares used for computation (in thousands):<sup>(2)</sup></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Basic</td><td>552,308</td><td>668,393</td><td>717,456</td><td>280,213</td><td>249,490</td></tr><tr><td>Diluted</td><td>556,099</td><td>687,355</td><td>734,016</td><td>280,213</td><td>249,490</td></tr><tr><td>Cash dividends declared per common share</td><td>$0.40</td><td>$0.40</td><td>$0.20</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td></tr><tr><td> Consolidated Balance Sheet data (at end of period):</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Total assets</td><td>$51,274</td><td>$48,415</td><td>$43,225</td><td>$41,741</td><td>$23,396</td></tr><tr><td>Long-term debt and capital leases, net of current maturities</td><td>22,489</td><td>18,330</td><td>16,043</td><td>15,212</td><td>7,019</td></tr><tr><td>Pension and postretirement benefits<sup>-3</sup></td><td>7,842</td><td>7,450</td><td>7,562</td><td>5,828</td><td>6,780</td></tr><tr><td>Liabilities subject to compromise</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>6,606</td></tr><tr><td>Stockholders’ equity (deficit)</td><td>3,785</td><td>5,635</td><td>2,021</td><td>-2,731</td><td>-7,987</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td></tr><tr><td>Net sales</td><td>$7,757</td><td>$7,457</td><td>$7,463</td></tr><tr><td>Operating profit</td><td>1,431</td><td>1,256</td><td>1,069</td></tr><tr><td>Operating margins</td><td>18.4%</td><td>16.8%</td><td>14.3%</td></tr><tr><td>Backlog at year-end</td><td>15,000</td><td>14,700</td><td>14,400</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Years Ended December 31,</td><td colspan="2">2016/2015</td><td colspan="2">2015/2014</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td><td>Variance</td><td>% Change</td><td>Variance</td><td>% Change</td></tr><tr><td>Gross written premiums</td><td>$1,787.0</td><td>$1,532.3</td><td>$1,218.4</td><td>$254.7</td><td>16.6%</td><td>$313.9</td><td>25.8%</td></tr><tr><td>Net written premiums</td><td>1,385.7</td><td>1,325.9</td><td>1,067.3</td><td>59.8</td><td>4.5%</td><td>258.6</td><td>24.2%</td></tr><tr><td>Premiums earned</td><td>$1,291.2</td><td>$1,266.7</td><td>$1,030.3</td><td>$24.6</td><td>1.9%</td><td>$236.4</td><td>22.9%</td></tr><tr><td>Incurred losses and LAE</td><td>1,122.7</td><td>1,033.3</td><td>811.4</td><td>89.4</td><td>8.7%</td><td>221.9</td><td>27.3%</td></tr><tr><td>Commission and brokerage</td><td>205.3</td><td>176.2</td><td>149.8</td><td>29.1</td><td>16.5%</td><td>26.4</td><td>17.7%</td></tr><tr><td>Other underwriting expenses</td><td>176.8</td><td>136.7</td><td>118.0</td><td>40.1</td><td>29.4%</td><td>18.7</td><td>15.8%</td></tr><tr><td>Underwriting gain (loss)</td><td>$-213.5</td><td>$-79.5</td><td>$-48.9</td><td>$-134.0</td><td>168.6%</td><td>$-30.6</td><td>62.5%</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>Point Chg</td><td></td><td>Point Chg</td></tr><tr><td>Loss ratio</td><td>86.9%</td><td>81.6%</td><td>78.8%</td><td></td><td>5.3</td><td></td><td>2.8</td></tr><tr><td>Commission and brokerage ratio</td><td>15.9%</td><td>13.9%</td><td>14.5%</td><td></td><td>2.0</td><td></td><td>-0.6</td></tr><tr><td>Other underwriting expense ratio</td><td>13.7%</td><td>10.8%</td><td>11.4%</td><td></td><td>2.9</td><td></td><td>-0.6</td></tr><tr><td>Combined ratio</td><td>116.5%</td><td>106.3%</td><td>104.7%</td><td></td><td>10.2</td><td></td><td>1.6</td></tr><tr><td>(Some amounts may not reconcile due to rounding.)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></table>

Question: The total amount of which section ranks first in 2016?
Answer: Diluted