ONEOK Partners’ commodity price risk is estimated as a hypothetical change in the price of NGLs, crude oil and natural gas at December 31, 2008, excluding the effects of hedging and assuming normal operating conditions.
ONEOK Partners’ condensate sales are based on the price of crude oil.
ONEOK Partners estimates the following: ?
a $0.01 per gallon decrease in the composite price of NGLs would decrease annual net margin by approximately $1.2 million; ?
a $1.00 per barrel decrease in the price of crude oil would decrease annual net margin by approximately $1.0 million; and ?
a $0.10 per MMBtu decrease in the price of natural gas would decrease annual net margin by approximately $0.6 million.
The above estimates of commodity price risk do not include any effects on demand for its services that might be caused by, or arise in conjunction with, price changes.
For example, a change in the gross processing spread may cause a change in the amount of ethane extracted from the natural gas stream, impacting gathering and processing margins, NGL exchange revenues, natural gas deliveries, and NGL volumes shipped and fractionated.
ONEOK Partners is also exposed to commodity price risk primarily as a result of NGLs in storage, the relative values of the various NGL products to each other, the relative value of NGLs to natural gas and the relative value of NGL purchases at one location and sales at another location, known as basis risk.
ONEOK Partners utilizes fixed-price physical forward contracts to reduce earnings volatility related to NGL price fluctuations.
ONEOK Partners has not entered into any financial instruments with respect to its NGL marketing activities.
In addition, ONEOK Partners is exposed to commodity price risk as its natural gas interstate and intrastate pipelines collect natural gas from its customers for operations or as part of its fee for services provided.
When the amount of natural gas consumed in operations by these pipelines differs from the amount provided by its customers, the pipelines must buy or sell natural gas, or store or use natural gas from inventory, which exposes ONEOK Partners to commodity price risk.
At December 31, 2008, there were no hedges in place with respect to natural gas price risk from ONEOK Partners’ natural gas pipeline business.
Distribution  Our Distribution segment uses derivative instruments to hedge the cost of anticipated natural gas purchases during the winter heating months to protect their customers from upward volatility in the market price of natural gas.
Gains or losses associated with these derivative instruments are included in, and recoverable through, the monthly purchased gas cost mechanism.
Energy Services  Our Energy Services segment is exposed to commodity price risk, basis risk and price volatility arising from natural gas in storage, requirement contracts, asset management contracts and index-based purchases and sales of natural gas at various market locations.
We minimize the volatility of our exposure to commodity price risk through the use of derivative instruments, which, under certain circumstances, are designated as cash flow or fair value hedges.
We are also exposed to commodity price risk from fixed-price purchases and sales of natural gas, which we hedge with derivative instruments.
Both the fixed-price purchases and sales and related derivatives are recorded at fair value.
Fair Value Component of the Energy Marketing and Risk Management Assets and Liabilities - The following table sets forth the fair value component of the energy marketing and risk management assets and liabilities, excluding $21.0 million of net liabilities from derivative instruments declared as either fair value or cash flow hedges.
## Table 0 ##
(a) - The maturities of derivatives are based on injection and withdrawal periods from  April through March, which is consistent with our business strategy.
The maturities are as follows: $225.0 million matures through March 2009, $33.9 million matures  through March 2012 and $(0.1) million matures through March 2014.
For U. S.  income tax purposes the Company has foreign tax credit carryforwards of $64.6 million that begin to expire in 2011.
In addition, for U. S.  income tax purposes the Company has $35.4 million of Alternative Minimum Tax credits that do not expire.
Management believes that it is more likely than not that the Company will realize the benefits of its net deferred tax assets and accordingly, no valuation allowance has been recorded for the periods presented.
Tax benefits of $6.1 million and $5.6 million related to compensation expense deductions for stock options exercised in 2006 and 2005, respectively, are reflected in the change in shareholders’ equity in “additional paid-in capital”.
In addition, during 2005, the Company sold treasury shares resulting in proceeds of $46.5 million compared with a cost basis of $23.0 million.
Additional paid-in capital was reduced by $8.2 million of income taxes resulting from this transaction.11.
REINSURANCE The Company utilizes reinsurance agreements to reduce its exposure to large claims and catastrophic loss occurrences.
These agreements provide for recovery from reinsurers of a portion of losses and LAE under certain circumstances without relieving the ceding company of its obligations to the policyholders.
Losses and LAE incurred and premiums earned are reported after deduction for reinsurance.
In the event that one or more of the reinsurers were unable to meet their obligations under these reinsurance agreements, the Company would not realize the full value of the reinsurance recoverable balances.
The Company may hold partial collateral, including letters of credit and funds held, under these agreements.
See also Note 1C.
For years ended December 31, 1999, 2000 and 2001, the Company purchased accident year aggregate excess of loss retrocession coverage that provided up to $175.0 million of coverage for each year.
These excess of loss policies provided coverage if Everest Re’s consolidated statutory basis accident year loss ratio exceeded a specified loss ratio attachment point for each year of coverage.
The attachment point was net of inuring reinsurance and included adjustable premium provisions that effectively caused the Company to offset, on a pre-tax income basis up to approximately 57% of such ceded losses.
The maximum recovery for each year is $175.0 million before giving effect to the adjustable premium.
During 2003, the Company ceded $85.0 million of losses, to the 2000 cover, effectively exhausting the maximum limit under the contract.
The 2001 and 1999 accident year aggregate excess of loss retrocession coverages were fully exhausted prior to January 1, 2003.
The Company did not purchase similar corporate level coverage subsequent to December 31, 2001.
In addition, the Company had coverage under an aggregate excess of loss reinsurance agreement provided by LM in connection with the Company’s acquisition of Mt.
McKinley in September 2000.
This agreement covers 80% or $160.0 million of the first $200 million of any adverse loss reserve development on the carried reserves of Mt.
McKinley at the date of acquisition and reimburses the Company as such losses are paid by the Company.
There were $160.0 million of recoverables under this reinsurance at December 31, 2003.
The Prudential continues to guarantee LM’s obligation under this agreement.
Premiums written and earned are comprised of the following
## Table 1 ##
The amounts deducted from losses and LAE incurred for net reinsurance recoveries were $109.5 million, $95.2 million and $141.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively.
As of December 31, 2006, the Company carried as an asset $772.8 million in reinsurance receivables with respect to losses ceded.
Of this amount, $169.4 million, or 21.9%, was receivable from Transatlantic, $100.9 million, or 13.1%, was receivable from LM, $100.2 million, or 13.0%, was receivable from Founders, of which $38.3 million is held in a trust, $100.0 million, or 12.9%, was receivable from Continental, $52.5 million, or 6.8%, was receivable from subsidiaries of London Life and $42.7 million, or 5.5%, was receivable from Munich Re.
As of December 31, 2005, the Company had $1,048.7 million in
Bermuda.
The following table presents the underwriting results and ratios for the Bermuda segment for the periods indicated.
## Table 2 ##
(Some amounts may not reconcile due to rounding. )
Premiums.
Gross written premiums increased 13.2% to $922.5 million for 2007 compared to $814.9 million for 2006.
Premiums written from the Bermuda office increased $61.0 million, or 22.9%, and premiums written from the UK office increased $47.3 million, or 8.6%.
The increase in the Bermuda office premiums was driven by growth in worldwide treaty casualty reinsurance business and approximately half of the increase from the UK office was driven by the Pound Sterling currency strengthening against the U. S.  dollar during 2007.
Net written premiums increased 13.0% to $922.3 million for 2007 compared to $816.2 million for 2006, commensurate with the increase in gross written premiums.
Net premiums earned increased 7.9% to $912.9 million for 2007 compared to $846.4 million for 2006.
The change in net premiums earned relative to the net written premiums is the result of timing; premiums are earned ratably over the coverage period whereas written premiums are reflected at the initiation of the coverage period.
Gross written premiums increased 6.0% to $814.9 million for 2006 compared to $768.7 million for 2005.
Premiums written from the UK office increased $72.4 million, or 15.2%, and premiums written from the Bermuda office decreased $26.5 million, or 9.0%.
Contributing to the growth was a slight increase in both the worldwide casualty and property business.
Net written premiums increased 6.2% to $816.2 million for 2006 compared to $768.8 million for 2005, as the result of the increase in gross written premiums.
Net premiums earned increased 11.5% to $846.4 million for 2006 compared to $759.1 million for 2005.
Reinsurance Receivables.
Reinsurance receivables for both paid and recoverable on unpaid losses totaled $1,787,648 thousand and $1,348,226 thousand at December 31, 2018 and December 31, 2017, respectively.
At December 31, 2018, $683,775 thousand, or 38.3%, was receivable from Mt.
Logan Re collateralized segregated accounts; $125,519 thousand, or 7.0% was receivable from Munich Reinsurance America, Inc.  (“Munich Re”); $122,050 thousand, or 6.8%, was receivable from Zurich Versicherungs Gesellschaft (“Zurich”); and $103,052 thousand, or 5.8%, was receivable from Resolution Group Reinsurance (Barbados) Limited (“Resolution Group”).
The receivables from Resolution Group are fully collateralized by an individual trust agreement.
No other retrocessionaire accounted for more than 5% of our receivables.
Future Policy Benefit Reserve.
Activity in the reserve for future policy benefits is summarized for the periods indicated:

<table><tr><td></td><td>(Thousands of dollars)</td></tr><tr><td>Net fair value of derivatives outstanding at December 31, 2007</td><td>$25,171</td></tr><tr><td>Derivatives reclassified or otherwise settled during the period</td><td>-55,874</td></tr><tr><td>Fair value of new derivatives entered into during the period</td><td>236,772</td></tr><tr><td>Other changes in fair value</td><td>52,731</td></tr><tr><td>Net fair value of derivatives outstanding at December 31, 2008 (a)</td><td>$258,800</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Years Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in thousands)</td><td>2006</td><td>2005</td><td>2004</td></tr><tr><td>Written premiums:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Direct</td><td>$933,488</td><td>$992,322</td><td>$1,293,545</td></tr><tr><td>Assumed</td><td>3,067,382</td><td>3,116,240</td><td>3,410,589</td></tr><tr><td>Ceded</td><td>-125,156</td><td>-136,521</td><td>-172,646</td></tr><tr><td>Net written premiums</td><td>$3,875,714</td><td>$3,972,041</td><td>$4,531,488</td></tr><tr><td>Premiums earned:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Direct</td><td>$996,196</td><td>$1,059,069</td><td>$1,181,278</td></tr><tr><td>Assumed</td><td>2,999,154</td><td>3,040,393</td><td>3,430,270</td></tr><tr><td>Ceded</td><td>-142,197</td><td>-136,369</td><td>-186,466</td></tr><tr><td>Net premiums earned</td><td>$3,853,153</td><td>$3,963,093</td><td>$4,425,082</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Years Ended December 31,</td><td colspan="2">2007/2006</td><td colspan="2">2006/2005</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td>2007</td><td>2006</td><td>2005</td><td>Variance</td><td>% Change</td><td>Variance</td><td>% Change</td></tr><tr><td>Gross written premiums</td><td>$ 922.5</td><td>$ 814.9</td><td>$ 768.7</td><td>$ 107.6</td><td>13.2%</td><td>$ 46.2</td><td>6.0%</td></tr><tr><td>Net written premiums</td><td>922.3</td><td>816.2</td><td>768.8</td><td>106.1</td><td>13.0%</td><td>47.4</td><td>6.2%</td></tr><tr><td>Premiums earned</td><td>$ 912.9</td><td>$ 846.4</td><td>$ 759.1</td><td>$ 66.5</td><td>7.9%</td><td>$ 87.3</td><td>11.5%</td></tr><tr><td>Incurred losses and LAE</td><td>611.2</td><td>516.6</td><td>821.4</td><td>94.6</td><td>18.3%</td><td>-304.8</td><td>-37.1%</td></tr><tr><td>Commission and brokerage</td><td>230.4</td><td>213.7</td><td>177.5</td><td>16.7</td><td>7.8%</td><td>36.2</td><td>20.4%</td></tr><tr><td>Other underwriting expenses</td><td>20.9</td><td>17.2</td><td>16.2</td><td>3.7</td><td>21.5%</td><td>1.0</td><td>6.2%</td></tr><tr><td>Underwriting gain (loss)</td><td>$ 50.4</td><td>$ 99.0</td><td>$ -256.0</td><td>$ -48.6</td><td>-49.1%</td><td>$ 355.0</td><td>138.7%</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>67.0%</td><td>61.0%</td><td>108.2%</td><td></td><td>6.0</td><td></td><td>-47.2</td></tr><tr><td>Commission and brokerage ratio</td><td>25.2%</td><td>25.3%</td><td>23.4%</td><td></td><td>-0.1</td><td></td><td>1.9</td></tr><tr><td>Other underwriting expense ratio</td><td>2.3%</td><td>2.0%</td><td>2.1%</td><td></td><td>0.3</td><td></td><td>-0.1</td></tr><tr><td>Combined ratio</td><td>94.5%</td><td>88.3%</td><td>133.7%</td><td></td><td>6.2</td><td></td><td>-45.4</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2">(Some amounts may not reconcile due to rounding.)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></table>

Question: what was the percentage change in net fair value of derivatives outstanding at between 2007 and 2008 in thousands?
Answer: 9.28167