R.  ONEOK PARTNERS General Partner Interest - See Note B for discussion of the April 2006 acquisition of the additional general partner interest in ONEOK Partners.
The limited partner units we received from ONEOK Partners were newly created Class B limited partner units.
As of April 7, 2007, the Class B limited partner units are no longer subordinated to distributions on ONEOK Partners’ common units and generally have the same voting rights as the common units and are entitled to receive increased quarterly distributions and distributions on liquidation equal to 110 percent of the distributions paid with respect to the common units.
On June 21, 2007, we, as the sole holder of ONEOK Partners Class B limited partner units, waived our right to receive the increased quarterly distributions on the Class B units for the period April 7, 2007, through December 31, 2007, and continuing thereafter until we give ONEOK Partners no less than 90 days advance notice that we have withdrawn our waiver.
Any such withdrawal of the waiver will be effective with respect to any distribution on the Class B units declared or paid on or after 90 days following delivery of the notice.
Under the ONEOK Partners’ partnership agreement and in conjunction with the issuance of additional common units by ONEOK Partners, we, as the general partner, are required to make equity contributions in order to maintain our representative general partner interest.
Our investment in ONEOK Partners is shown in the table below for the periods presented.
## Table 0 ##
(a) - Represents approximately 0.5 million common units and 36.5 million Class B units.
(b) - Represents approximately 0.5 million common units.
Cash Distributions - Under the ONEOK Partners’ partnership agreement, distributions are made to the partners with respect to each calendar quarter in an amount equal to 100 percent of available cash.
Available cash generally consists of all cash receipts adjusted for cash disbursements and net changes to cash reserves.
Available cash will generally be distributed 98 percent to limited partners and 2 percent to the general partner.
As an incentive, the general partner’s percentage interest in quarterly distributions is increased after certain specified target levels are met.
Under the incentive distribution provisions, the general partner receives: ?15 percent of amounts distributed in excess of $0.605 per unit, ?25 percent of amounts distributed in excess of $0.715 per unit, and ?50 percent of amounts distributed in excess of $0.935 per unit.
ONEOK Partners’ income is allocated to the general and limited partners in accordance with their respective partnership ownership percentages.
The effect of any incremental income allocations for incentive distributions that are allocated to the general partner is calculated after the income allocation for the general partner’s partnership interest and before the income allocation to the limited partners.
The following table shows ONEOK Partners’ general partner and incentive distributions related to the periods indicated.
## Table 1 ##
The quarterly distributions paid by ONEOK Partners to limited partners in the first, second, third and fourth quarters of 2007 were $0.98 per unit, $0.99 per unit, $1.00 per unit, and $1.01 per unit, respectively.
gas.
The use of these derivative instruments and the associated recovery of these costs have been approved by the OCC, KCC and regulatory authorities in certain of our Texas jurisdictions.
ONEOK entered into forward-starting interest-rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges of the variability of interest payments on a portion of forecasted debt issuances that may result from changes in the benchmark interest rate before the debt is issued.
ONEOK had interest-rate swaps with notional values totaling $500 million at December 31, 2011.
In January 2012, ONEOK entered into additional interest-rate swaps with notional amounts totaling $200 million.
Upon issuance in January 2012 of our $700 million, 4.25-percent senior notes due 2022, ONEOK settled all $700 million of its interest-rate swaps and realized a loss of $44.1 million in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) that will be amortized to interest expense over the term of the related debt.
ONEOK Partners entered into forward-starting interest-rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges of the variability of interest payments on a portion of forecasted debt issuances that may result from changes in the benchmark interest rate before the debt is issued.
At December 31, 2011, ONEOK Partners had interest-rate swaps with notional values totaling $750 million.
During the year ended December 31, 2012, ONEOK Partners entered into additional interest-rate swaps with notional amounts totaling $650 million.
Upon ONEOK Partners’ debt issuance in September 2012, ONEOK Partners settled $1 billion of its interest-rate swaps and realized a loss of $124.9 million in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) that will be amortized to interest expense over the term of the related debt.
At December 31, 2012, ONEOK Partners’ remaining interest-rate swaps with notional amounts totaling $400 million have settlement dates greater than 12 months.
Fair Values of Derivative Instruments - The following table sets forth the fair values of our derivative instruments for our continuing and discontinued operations for the periods indicated:
## Table 2 ##
(a) - Included on a net basis in energy marketing and risk-management assets and liabilities, other assets and other deferred credits on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.
(b) - Includes $16.9 million of derivative net assets and ineffectiveness associated with cash flow hedges of inventory related to certain financial contracts that were used to hedge forecasted purchases and sales of natural gas.
The deferred gains associated with these assets have been reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income (loss).
(c) - Includes $88.9 million of derivative assets associated with cash flow hedges of inventory that were adjusted to reflect the lower of cost or market value.
The deferred gains associated with these assets have been reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income (loss).
guidance to amend or clarify portions of the final rule in 2013.
We anticipate that if the EPA issues additional responses, amendments and/or policy guidance on the final rule, it will reduce the anticipated capital, operations and maintenance costs resulting from the regulation.
Generally, the NSPS final rule will require expenditures for updated emissions controls, monitoring and record-keeping requirements at affected facilities in the crude-oil and natural gas industry.
We do not expect these expenditures will have a material impact on our results of operations, financial position or cash flows.
CERCLA - The federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, also commonly known as Superfund (CERCLA), imposes strict, joint and several liability, without regard to fault or the legality of the original act, on certain classes of “persons” (defined under CERCLA) that caused and/or contributed to the release of a hazardous substance into the environment.
These persons include but are not limited to the owner or operator of a facility where the release occurred and/or companies that disposed or arranged for the disposal of the hazardous substances found at the facility.
Under CERCLA, these persons may be liable for the costs of cleaning up the hazardous substances released into the environment, damages to natural resources and the costs of certain health studies.
Neither we nor ONEOK Partners expect our respective responsibilities under CERCLA, for this facility and any other, will have a material impact on our respective results of operations, financial position or cash flows.
Chemical Site Security - The United States Department of Homeland Security released an interim rule in April 2007 that requires companies to provide reports on sites where certain chemicals, including many hydrocarbon products, are stored.
We completed the Homeland Security assessments, and our facilities subsequently were assigned one of four risk-based tiers ranging from high (Tier 1) to low (Tier 4) risk, or not tiered at all due to low risk.
To date, four of our facilities have been given a Tier 4 rating.
Facilities receiving a Tier 4 rating are required to complete Site Security Plans and possible physical security enhancements.
We do not expect the Site Security Plans and possible security enhancements cost will have a material impact on our results of operations, financial position or cash flows.
Pipeline Security - The United States Department of Homeland Security’s Transportation Security Administration and the DOT have completed a review and inspection of our “critical facilities” and identified no material security issues.
Also, the Transportation Security Administration has released new pipeline security guidelines that include broader definitions for the determination of pipeline “critical facilities.
” We have reviewed our pipeline facilities according to the new guideline requirements, and there have been no material changes required to date.
Environmental Footprint - Our environmental and climate change strategy focuses on taking steps to minimize the impact of our operations on the environment.
These strategies include: (i) developing and maintaining an accurate greenhouse gas emissions inventory according to current rules issued by the EPA; (ii) improving the efficiency of our various pipelines, natural gas processing facilities and natural gas liquids fractionation facilities; (iii) following developing technologies for emission control and the capture of carbon dioxide to keep it from reaching the atmosphere; and (iv) utilizing practices to reduce the loss of methane from our facilities.
We participate in the EPA’s Natural Gas STAR Program to voluntarily reduce methane emissions.
We continue to focus on maintaining low rates of lost-and-unaccounted-for natural gas through expanded implementation of best practices to limit the release of natural gas during pipeline and facility maintenance and operations.
EMPLOYEESWe employed 4,859 people at January 31, 2013, including 705 people at Kansas Gas Service who are subject to collective bargaining agreements.
The following table sets forth our contracts with collective bargaining units at January 31, 2013:

<table><tr><td></td><td>December 31, 2007</td><td>December 31, 2006</td><td>December 31, 2005</td></tr><tr><td>General partner interest</td><td>2.00%</td><td>2.00%</td><td>1.65%</td></tr><tr><td>Limited partner interest</td><td>43.70% (a)</td><td>43.70% (a)</td><td>1.05% (b)</td></tr><tr><td>Total ownership interest</td><td>45.70%</td><td>45.70%</td><td>2.70%</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3"> Years Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td> 2007</td><td> 2006</td><td> 2005</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="3"><i>(Thousands of dollars)</i></td></tr><tr><td>General partner distributions</td><td>$7,842</td><td>$6,228</td><td>$2,632</td></tr><tr><td>Incentive distributions</td><td>50,627</td><td>31,102</td><td>6,568</td></tr><tr><td>Total distributions from ONEOK Partners</td><td>$58,469</td><td>$37,330</td><td>$9,200</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">December 31, 2012 Fair Values of Derivatives (a)</td><td colspan="2">December 31, 2011 Fair Values of Derivatives (a)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Assets</td><td>(Liabilities)</td><td>Assets</td><td>(Liabilities)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="4">(Thousands of dollars)</td></tr><tr><td>Derivatives designated as hedging instruments</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Commodity contracts</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Financial contracts</td><td>$47,516(b)</td><td>$-4,885</td><td>$184,184(c)</td><td>$-73,346</td></tr><tr><td>Physical contracts</td><td>56</td><td>-126</td><td>62</td><td>-344</td></tr><tr><td>Interest-rate contracts</td><td>10,923</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>-128,666</td></tr><tr><td>Total derivatives designated as hedging instruments</td><td>58,495</td><td>-5,011</td><td>184,246</td><td>-202,356</td></tr><tr><td>Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Commodity contracts</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Nontrading instruments</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Financial contracts</td><td>24,970</td><td>-25,009</td><td>295,948</td><td>-323,170</td></tr><tr><td>Physical contracts</td><td>4,059</td><td>-153</td><td>38,733</td><td>-1,665</td></tr><tr><td>Trading instruments</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Financial contracts</td><td>15,358</td><td>-14,192</td><td>111,920</td><td>-110,050</td></tr><tr><td>Total derivatives not designated as hedging instruments</td><td>44,387</td><td>-39,354</td><td>446,601</td><td>-434,885</td></tr><tr><td>Total derivatives</td><td>$102,882</td><td>$-44,365</td><td>$630,847</td><td>$-637,241</td></tr></table>

Question: In terms of Assets,which year is Fair Values of Total derivatives designated as hedging instruments on December 31 higher?
Answer: 2011