Ameren determines discount rate assumptions by using an interest rate yield curve pursuant to authoritative accounting guidance on the determination of discount rates used for defined benefit plan obligations.
The yield curve is based on the yields of more than 500 high-quality corporate bonds with maturities between zero and 30 years.
A theoretical spot-rate curve constructed from this yield curve is then used as a guide to develop a discount rate matching the plans’ payout structure.
Funding Pension benefits are based on the employees’ years of service and compensation.
Ameren’s pension plan is funded in compliance with income tax regulations and federal funding or regulatory requirements.
As a result, Ameren expects to fund its pension plan at a level equal to the greater of the pension expense or the legally required minimum contribution.
Considering Ameren’s assumptions at December 31, 2011, its investment performance in 2011, and its pension funding policy, Ameren expects to make annual contributions of $90 million to $150 million in each of the next five years, with aggregate estimated contributions of $580 million.
We expect Ameren Missouri’s, Ameren Illinois’ and Genco’s portion of the future funding requirements to be 51%, 33%, and 12%, respectively.
These amounts are estimates.
The estimates may change based on actual investment performance, changes in interest rates, changes in our assumptions, any pertinent changes in government regulations, and any voluntary contributions.
Our funding policy for postretirement benefits is primarily to fund the Voluntary Employee Beneficiary Association (VEBA) trusts to match the annual postretirement expense.
The following table presents the cash contributions made to our defined benefit retirement plan and to our postretirement plans during 2011, 2010, and 2009:
## Table 0 ##
(a) Includes amounts for Ameren registrant and nonregistrant subsidiaries.
Investment Strategy and Policies Ameren manages plan assets in accordance with the “prudent investor” guidelines contained in ERISA.
The investment committee, to the extent authority is delegated to it by the finance committee of Ameren’s board of directors, implements investment strategy and asset allocation guidelines for the plan assets.
The investment committee includes members of senior management.
The investment committee’s goals are twofold: first, to ensure that sufficient funds are available to provide the benefits at the time they are payable, and second, to maximize total return on plan assets and minimize expense volatility consistent with its tolerance for risk.
Ameren delegates investment management to specialists in each asset class.
As appropriate, Ameren provides the investment manager with guidelines that specify allowable and prohibited investment types.
The investment committee regularly monitors manager performance and compliance with investment guidelines.
The expected return on plan assets assumption is based on historical and projected rates of return for current and planned asset classes in the investment portfolio.
Projected rates of return for each asset class were estimated after an analysis of historical experience, future expectations, and the volatility of the various asset classes.
After considering the target asset allocation for each asset class, we adjusted the overall expected rate of return for the portfolio for historical and expected experience of active portfolio management results compared with benchmark returns and for the effect of expenses paid from plan assets.
Ameren will utilize an expected return on plan assets for its pension plan assets and postretirement plan assets of 7.75% and 7.50%, respectively, in 2012.
No plan assets are expected to be returned to Ameren during 2012.
Notes to the Financial Statements — Continued that company under the Credit Agreement immediately due and payable.
Events of default include the exceeding at any time of a ratio of consolidated debt to consolidated total capital of 0.65 to 1 (at December 31, 2008, this ratio was 0.51 to 1 for both Con Edison and Con Edison of New York); having liens on its assets in an aggregate amount exceeding 5 percent of its consolidated total capital, subject to certain exceptions; and the failure by the company, following any applicable notice period, to meet certain other customary covenants.
The fees charged for the revolving credit facilities and any loans made or letters of credit issued under the Credit Agreement reflect the Companies’ respective credit ratings.
At December 31, 2008 and 2007, $316 million (including $107 million for Con Edison of New York) and $59 million (including $16 million for Con Edison of New York) of letters of credit were outstanding under the Credit Agreement, respectively.
See Note S for information about short-term borrowing between related parties.
Note E – Pension Benefits Con Edison maintains a tax-qualified, non-contributory pension plan that covers substantially all employees of Con Edison of New York and O&R and certain employees of Con Edison’s competitive energy businesses.
The plan is designed to comply with the Internal Revenue Code and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974.
In addition, Con Edison maintains additional non-qualified supplemental pension plans.
Investment gains and losses are fully recognized in expense over a 15-year period and other actuarial gains and losses are fully recognized in expense over a 10-year period, subject to the deferral provisions discussed in the next paragraph.
This amortization is in accordance with the Statement of Policy issued by the PSC and is permitted under SFAS No.87, “Employers’ Accounting for Pensions,” which provides a “corridor method” for moderating the effect of investment gains and losses on pension expense, or alternatively, allows for any systematic method of amortization of unrecognized gains and losses that is faster than the corridor method and is applied consistently to both gains and losses.
In accordance with its current electric, gas and steam rate agreements, Con Edison of New York is deferring the difference between expenses recognized under SFAS No.87 and the rate allowance.
Generally, O&R has also been deferring such difference pursuant to its rate agreements.
See Note B.
Net Periodic Benefit Cost The components of the Companies’ net periodic benefit costs for 2008, 2007 and 2006 were as follows:
## Table 1 ##
* Relates to increases in Con Edison of New York’s pension obligations of $33 million from a 1993 special retirement program and $45 million from a 1999 special retirement program.
2015 compared to 2014 MFC’s net sales in 2015 decreased $322 million, or 5%, compared to the same period in 2014.
The decrease was attributable to lower net sales of approximately $345 million for air and missile defense programs due to fewer deliveries (primarily PAC-3) and lower volume (primarily THAAD); and approximately $85 million for tactical missile programs due to fewer deliveries (primarily Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS)) and Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile, partially offset by increased deliveries for Hellfire.
These decreases were partially offset by higher net sales of approximately $55 million for energy solutions programs due to increased volume.
MFC’s operating profit in 2015 decreased $62 million, or 5%, compared to 2014.
The decrease was attributable to lower operating profit of approximately $100 million for fire control programs due primarily to lower risk retirements (primarily LANTIRN and SNIPER); and approximately $65 million for tactical missile programs due to lower risk retirements (primarily Hellfire and GMLRS) and fewer deliveries.
These decreases were partially offset by higher operating profit of approximately $75 million for air and missile defense programs due to increased risk retirements (primarily THAAD).
Adjustments not related to volume, including net profit booking rate adjustments and other matters, were approximately $60 million lower in 2015 compared to 2014.
Backlog Backlog decreased in 2016 compared to 2015 primarily due to lower orders on PAC-3, Hellfire, and JASSM.
Backlog increased in 2015 compared to 2014 primarily due to higher orders on PAC-3, LANTIRN/Sniper and certain tactical missile programs, partially offset by lower orders on THAAD.
Trends We expect MFC’s net sales to increase in the mid-single digit percentage range in 2017 as compared to 2016 driven primarily by our air and missile defense programs.
Operating profit is expected to be flat or increase slightly.
Accordingly, operating profit margin is expected to decline from 2016 levels as a result of contract mix and fewer risk retirements in 2017 compared to 2016.
Rotary and Mission Systems As previously described, on November 6, 2015, we acquired Sikorsky and aligned the Sikorsky business under our RMS business segment.
The 2015 results of the acquired Sikorsky business have been included in our financial results from the November 6, 2015 acquisition date through December 31, 2015.
As a result, our consolidated operating results and RMS business segment operating results for the year ended December 31, 2015 do not reflect a full year of Sikorsky operations.
Our RMS business segment provides design, manufacture, service and support for a variety of military and civil helicopters, ship and submarine mission and combat systems; mission systems and sensors for rotary and fixed-wing aircraft; sea and land-based missile defense systems; radar systems; the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS); simulation and training services; and unmanned systems and technologies.
In addition, RMS supports the needs of government customers in cybersecurity and delivers communication and command and control capabilities through complex mission solutions for defense applications.
RMS’ major programs include Black Hawk and Seahawk helicopters, Aegis Combat System (Aegis), LCS, Space Fence, Advanced Hawkeye Radar System, TPQ-53 Radar System, CH-53K development helicopter, and VH-92A helicopter program.
RMS’ operating results included the following (in millions):
## Table 2 ##
2016 compared to 2015 RMS’ net sales in 2016 increased $4.4 billion, or 48%, compared to 2015.
The increase was primarily attributable to higher net sales of approximately $4.6 billion from Sikorsky, which was acquired on November 6, 2015.
Net sales for 2015 include Sikorsky’s results subsequent to the acquisition date, net of certain revenue adjustments required to account for the acquisition of this business.
This increase was partially offset by lower net sales of approximately $70 million for training

<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3"> Pension Benefits</td><td colspan="3"> Postretirement Benefits</td></tr><tr><td></td><td> 2011</td><td> 2010</td><td> 2009</td><td> 2011</td><td> 2010</td><td> 2009</td></tr><tr><td>Ameren<sup>(a)</sup></td><td>$103</td><td>$81</td><td>$99</td><td>$129</td><td>$36</td><td>$49</td></tr><tr><td>AMO</td><td>43</td><td>36</td><td>42</td><td>9</td><td>11</td><td>13</td></tr><tr><td>AIC</td><td>28</td><td>23</td><td>25</td><td>118</td><td>20</td><td>28</td></tr><tr><td>Genco</td><td>12</td><td>4</td><td>10</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Con Edison</td><td colspan="3">Con Edison of New York</td></tr><tr><td> (Millions of Dollars)</td><td>2008</td><td>2007</td><td>2006</td><td>2008</td><td>2007</td><td>2006</td></tr><tr><td>Service cost – including administrative expenses</td><td>$139</td><td>$131</td><td>$133</td><td>$129</td><td>$122</td><td>$123</td></tr><tr><td>Interest cost on projected benefit obligation</td><td>515</td><td>491</td><td>460</td><td>482</td><td>459</td><td>430</td></tr><tr><td>Expected return on plan assets</td><td>-691</td><td>-646</td><td>-620</td><td>-660</td><td>-618</td><td>-595</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization of net actuarial loss</td><td>192</td><td>160</td><td>126</td><td>170</td><td>139</td><td>105</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization of prior service costs</td><td>8</td><td>11</td><td>13</td><td>7</td><td>9</td><td>11</td></tr><tr><td> Net Periodic Benefit Cost</td><td>$163</td><td>$147</td><td>$112</td><td>$128</td><td>$111</td><td>$74</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization of regulatory asset*</td><td>4</td><td>4</td><td>4</td><td>4</td><td>4</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td> Total Periodic Benefit Cost</td><td>$167</td><td>$151</td><td>$116</td><td>$132</td><td>$115</td><td>$78</td></tr><tr><td>Cost capitalized</td><td>-59</td><td>-50</td><td>-34</td><td>-50</td><td>-41</td><td>-26</td></tr><tr><td>Cost deferred</td><td>-40</td><td>-86</td><td>-108</td><td>-40</td><td>-87</td><td>-95</td></tr><tr><td>Cost charged (credited) to operating expenses</td><td>$68</td><td>$15</td><td>$-26</td><td>$42</td><td>$-13</td><td>$-43</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td></tr><tr><td>Net sales</td><td>$13,462</td><td>$9,091</td><td>$8,732</td></tr><tr><td>Operating profit</td><td>906</td><td>844</td><td>936</td></tr><tr><td>Operating margin</td><td>6.7%</td><td>9.3%</td><td>10.7%</td></tr><tr><td>Backlog atyear-end</td><td>$28,400</td><td>$30,100</td><td>$13,300</td></tr></table>

Question: What will Interest cost on projected benefit obligation in Con Edison be like in 2009 if it develops with the same increasing rate as current? (in millions)
Answer: 540.17312