Aon has certain contractual contingent guarantees for premium payments owed by clients to certain insurance companies.
The maximum exposure with respect to such contractual contingent guarantees was approximately $48 million at December 31, 2011.
Aon has provided commitments to fund certain limited partnerships in which it has an interest in the event that the general partners request funding.
Some of these commitments have specific expiration dates and the maximum potential funding under these commitments was $64 million at December 31, 2011.
During 2011, the Company funded $15 million of these commitments.
Aon expects that as prudent business interests dictate, additional guarantees and indemnifications may be issued from time to time.17.
Related Party Transactions During 2011, the Company, in the ordinary course of business, provided retail brokerage, consulting and financial advisory services to, and received wholesale brokerage services from, an entity that is controlled by one of the Company’s stockholders.
These transactions were negotiated at an arms-length basis and contain customary terms and conditions.
During 2011, commissions and fee revenue from these transactions was approximately $9 million.18.
Segment Information The Company has two reportable operating segments: Risk Solutions and HR Solutions.
Unallocated income and expenses, when combined with the operating segments and after the elimination of intersegment revenues and expenses, total to the amounts in the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Reportable operating segments have been determined using a management approach, which is consistent with the basis and manner in which Aon’s chief operating decision maker (‘‘CODM’’) uses financial information for the purposes of allocating resources and assessing performance.
The CODM assesses performance based on operating segment operating income and generally accounts for intersegment revenue as if the revenue were from third parties and at what management believes are current market prices.
The Company does not present net assets by segment as this information is not reviewed by the CODM.
Risk Solutions acts as an advisor and insurance and reinsurance broker, helping clients manage their risks, via consultation, as well as negotiation and placement of insurance risk with insurance carriers through Aon’s global distribution network.
HR Solutions partners with organizations to solve their most complex benefits, talent and related financial challenges, and improve business performance by designing, implementing, communicating and administering a wide range of human capital, retirement, investment management, health care, compensation and talent management strategies.
Aon’s total revenue is as follows (in millions):
## Table 0 ##
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (COMBINED FOR CON EDISON AND CON EDISON OF NEW YORK)–CONTINUED Taxes Other Than Income Taxes Taxes other than income taxes decreased $2 million in 2004 compared with 2003.
The principal components of, and variation, in taxes, other than income taxes were:
## Table 1 ##
(a) Including sales tax on customers’ bills, total taxes other than income taxes, billed to customers in 2004 and 2003 were $66 million and $69 million, respectively.
(b) Includes a sales and use tax refund of approximately $800,000.
Income Taxes Operating income taxes decreased by $17 million in 2004 compared with 2003 due primarily to the deferral of state income tax benefits for ratepayers in 2004 and lower taxable income in 2004 compared with 2003.
Other Income O&R’s other income (deductions) increased $3 million in 2004 compared with 2003, due primarily to the reclassification to other income (deductions) in 2003 of losses previously recognized in other comprehensive income related to investments in marketable securities.
Competitive Businesses and Other Competitive Energy Businesses The earnings of the competitive energy businesses were $12 million lower in 2004 than in 2003.
Excluding the effects of asset impairment charges and the cumulative effect of changes in accounting principles, earnings were $20 million lower in 2004.
The decrease in earnings reflects several factors, including lower gross margins realized on retail electric sales, a full year of operating expenses associated with generation assets placed in service in mid-2003, and depreciation expense on the Newington plant which was consolidated for financial statement purposes in the last quarter of 2003.
These negative impacts were partially offset by higher mark-to-market gains on forward transactions.
Operating revenues of the competitive energy businesses were $138 million higher in 2004 than in 2003, reflecting principally sales from Con Edison Development’s increased generating capacity and higher retail electric sales at Con Edison Solutions.
Operating expenses excluding income taxes increased by $129 million, reflecting principally increased purchased power and fuel costs ($192 million), depreciation ($17 million) and maintenance expenses ($8 million).
This increase was offset in part by lower costs for gas purchased for resale ($32 million), impairment charges recognized at Con Edison Development and Con Edison Solutions in 2003 ($18 million), lower taxes other than income taxes ($6 million) and decreased other operations expense at Con Edison Development ($32 million) due principally to the consolidation accounting associated with the Newington plant.
Lease payments were recorded in operations expense in 2003, whereas depreciation and interest expense were charged in 2004 in accordance with consolidation accounting.
See Note T to the financial statements.
Operating income taxes decreased $6 million in 2004 as compared with 2003 reflecting primarily lower taxable income.
Operating income for 2004 was $15 million higher than in 2003.
Other income (deductions) increased $4 million in 2004 as compared with 2003 due principally to unrealized gains on derivatives in 2004.
Interest charges for 2004 increased by $29 million as compared with 2003 due principally to the additional interest expense attributable to the consolidation of the Newington plant discussed above.
Other Earnings attributable to the parent company were $4 million lower in 2004 as compared with 2003 reflecting primarily higher interest expenses.
Discontinued Operations Losses from the discontinued operations of Con Edison Communications were $97 million lower in 2004 as compared with 2003 reflecting primarily the impairment charge totaling $84 million (after tax) recorded in 2003.
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS – CONTINUED any second-step assessment and did not result in any impairment.
The company’s most significant assumptions surrounding the goodwill impairment test relate to the estimates of reporting unit fair values.
The company estimated fair values based primarily on discounted cash flows and on market values for a proxy group of companies.
Accounting for Derivative Instruments The Companies apply the accounting rules for derivatives and hedging to their derivative financial instruments.
The Companies use derivative financial instruments to hedge market price fluctuations in related underlying transactions for the physical purchase and sale of electricity and gas and interest rate risk on certain debt securities.
The Utilities are permitted by their respective regulators to reflect in rates all reasonably incurred gains and losses on these instruments.
See “Financial and Commodity Market Risks,” below and Note O to the financial statements in Item 8.
Where the Companies are required to make mark-to-market estimates pursuant to the accounting rules, the estimates of gains and losses at a particular period end do not reflect the end results of particular transactions, and will most likely not reflect the actual gain or loss at the conclusion of a transaction.
Substantially all of the estimated gains or losses are based on prices supplied by external sources such as the fair value of exchange-traded futures and options and the fair value of positions for which price quotations are available through or derived from brokers or other market sources.
Accounting for Leases The Companies apply the accounting rules for leases and other related pronouncements to their leasing transactions.
In accordance with the accounting rules, Con Edison accounted for Con Edison Development’s two “Lease In/Lease Out” or LILO transactions as leveraged leases.
Accordingly, the company’s investment in these leases, net of non-recourse debt, is carried as a single amount in Con Edison’s consolidated balance sheet included in Item 8.
In January 2013, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed an October 2009 trial court ruling and disallowed company-claimed tax deductions relating to a 1997 transaction in which Con Edison Development leased property from the owner and then immediately subleased it back to the owner.
As a result, Con Edison expects to record an estimated charge of between $150 million and $170 million (after-tax) in the first quarter of 2013 to reflect the interest on disallowed federal and state income tax deductions and the recalculation of the accounting effect of the 1997 transaction and Con Edison Development’s 1999 LILO transaction.
The transactions did not impact earnings in either 2012 or 2011.
See Note J to the financial statements in Item 8.
Liquidity and Capital Resources The Companies’ liquidity reflects cash flows from operating, investing and financing activities, as shown on their respective consolidated statement of cash flows and as discussed below.
The principal factors affecting Con Edison’s liquidity are its investments in the Utilities, the dividends it pays to its shareholders and the dividends it receives from the Utilities and cash flows from financing activities discussed below.
In addition, in January 2013, Con Edison deposited $447 million with federal and state agencies in connection with Con Edison Development’s LILO transactions.
See Note J to the financial statements in Item 8.
The principal factors affecting CECONY’s liquidity are its cash flows from operating activities, cash used in investing activities (including construction expenditures), the dividends it pays to Con Edison and cash flows from financing activities discussed below.
The Companies generally maintain minimal cash balances and use short-term borrowings to meet their working capital needs and other cash requirements.
The Companies repay their shortterm borrowings using funds from long-term financings and operating activities.
The Utilities’ cost of capital, including working capital, is reflected in the rates they charge to their customers.
Each of the Companies believes that it will be able to meet its reasonably likely short-term and long-term cash requirements.
See “The Companies Require Access to Capital Markets to Satisfy Funding Requirements” and “The Companies Also Face Other Risks That Are Beyond Their Control” in Item 1A, “Application of Critical Accounting Policies – Accounting for Contingencies,” above, and “Utility Regulation” in Item 1.
Changes in the Companies’ cash and temporary cash investments resulting from operating, investing and financing activities for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010 are summarized as follows: Con Edison
## Table 2 ##
(e) Reflects a $3,007 million increase in net plant offset by a $1,002 million decrease in regulatory assets for unrecognized pension and other postretirement costs.
See Notes B, E and F to the financial statements in Item 8.
(f) Reflects $68 million, $74 million and $85 million in 2012, 2013 and 2014, respectively, related to the adoption of Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No.2015-03, “Interest - Imputation of Interest (Subtopic 835-30): Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs.
” (g) Reflects $296 million, $122 million and $152 million in 2012, 2013, 2014, respectively, related to the adoption of ASU No.2015-17, “Income Taxes (Topic 740): Balance Sheet Classification of Deferred Taxes.
” CECONY
## Table 3 ##
(a) Reflects a $2,797 million decrease in regulatory assets for unrecognized pension and other postretirement costs offset by an increase of $1,405 million, $280 million, $215 million and $199 million in net plant, cash, regulatory assets for environmental remediation costs and regulatory assets for future income tax, respectively.
(b) Reflects a $1,999 million increase in regulatory assets for unrecognized pension and other postretirement costs and a $1,440 million increase in net plant.
See Notes B, E and F to the financial statements in Item 8.
(c) Reflects a $1,725 million increase in net plant and a $912 million decrease in regulatory assets for unrecognized pension and other postretirement costs.
See Notes B, E and F to the financial statements in Item 8.
(d) Reflects a $1,804 million increase in net plant and a $967 million decrease in regulatory assets for unrecognized pension and other postretirement costs.
See Notes B, E and F to the financial statements in Item 8.
(e) Reflects $62 million, $63 million and $76 million in 2012, 2013 and 2014, respectively, related to the adoption of ASU No.2015-03, “Interest - Imputation of Interest (Subtopic 835-30): Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs.
” (f) Reflects $193 million, $100 million and $118 million in 2012, 2013 and 2014, respectively, related to the adoption of ASU No.2015-17, “Income Taxes (Topic 740): Balance Sheet Classification of Deferred Taxes.
” Significant 2016 Developments and Outlook ?
Con Edison reported 2016 net income of $1,245 million or $4.15 a share compared with $1,193 million or $4.07 a share in 2015.
Adjusted earnings were $1,198 million or $3.99 a share in 2016 compared with $1,196 million or $4.08 a share in 2015.
See “Results of Operations” in Item 7 and “Non-GAAP Financial Measure” below.  ?
In 2016, the Utilities invested $2,922 million to upgrade and reinforce their energy delivery systems, Con Edison Transmission invested $1,078 million in electric transmission and gas pipeline and storage businesses and the Clean Energy Businesses invested $1,235 million primarily in renewable electric production projects.
See "Capital Requirements and Resources" in Item 1 and Note U to the financial statements in Item 8.  ?
In 2017, the Utilities expect to invest $3,154 million for their energy delivery systems, Con Edison Transmission expects to invest $90 million in gas pipeline and storage businesses and the Clean Energy Businesses expect to invest $450 million in renewable electric production projects.
Con Edison plans to meet its 2017 capital requirements through internally-generated funds and the issuance of securities.
The company’s plans include the issuance of between $1,000 million and $1,800 million of long-term debt, most of which would be at the Utilities, and the issuance of additional debt secured by its renewable electric production projects.
The company’s plans also include the issuance of up to $350 million of common equity in addition to equity under its dividend reinvestment, employee stock purchase and long term incentive plans.
See “Capital Requirements and Resources” in Item 1.  ?
In 2016, the Clean Energy Businesses sold their retail electric supply business and O&R sold its Pennsylvania utility subsidiary for aggregate cash consideration of $250 million.
See Note U to the financial statements in Item 8.  ?
CECONY forecasts average annual growth in peak demand in its service area at design conditions over the next five years for electric and gas to be approximately 0.2 percent and 2.3 percent, respectively, and average annual decrease in steam peak demand in its service area at design conditions over the next five years to be approximately 0.7 percent.
O&R forecasts average annual decrease in electric peak demand in its service area at design conditions over the next five years to be approximately 0.1 percent and average annual growth in gas peak demand in its service area over the next five years at design conditions to be approximately 0.2 percent.
See “The Utilities” in Item 1
is delivered by pipeline to O&R at various points in or near its service territory and is distributed to customers by the company through an estimated 1,881 miles of mains and 105,496 service lines.
Gas Sales and Deliveries O&R generally recovers the cost of the gas that it buys and then sells to its full-service customers.
It does not make any margin or profit on the gas it sells.
O&R’s gas revenues are subject to a weather normalization clause.
O&R’s New York gas revenues (which have accounted for substantially all of O&R’s gas revenues) are subject to a revenue decoupling mechanism.
As a result, its gas delivery revenues are generally not affected by changes in delivery volumes from levels assumed when rates were approved.
O&R’s gas sales and deliveries for the last five years were:
## Table 4 ##
Year Ended December 31,
## Table 5 ##
For further discussion of the company’s gas operating revenues and its gas results, see “Results of Operations” in Item 7.
For additional segment information, see Note N to the financial statements in Item 8.
Gas Peak Demand The gas peak demand for firm sales customers in O&R’s service area occurs during the winter heating season.
The peak day demand during the winter 2018/2019 (through January 31, 2019) occurred on January 21, 2019 when the demand reached approximately 217 MDt.
“Design Weather” for the gas system is a standard to which the actual peak demand is adjusted for evaluation and planning purposes.
The company estimates that, under design weather conditions, the 2019/2020 service area peak day demand will be 228 MDt.
The forecasted peak day demand at design conditions does not include gas used by interruptible gas customers including electric generating stations.
The company forecasts an average annual growth of the gas peak demand over the next five years at design conditions to be approximately 0.6 percent in its service area.

Tables referenced above, in order (Table 0 first):
<table><tr><td>Years ended December 31</td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td><td>2009</td></tr><tr><td>Risk Solutions</td><td>$6,817</td><td>$6,423</td><td>$6,305</td></tr><tr><td>HR Solutions</td><td>4,501</td><td>2,111</td><td>1,267</td></tr><tr><td>Intersegment elimination</td><td>-31</td><td>-22</td><td>-26</td></tr><tr><td>Total operating segments</td><td>11,287</td><td>8,512</td><td>7,546</td></tr><tr><td>Unallocated</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>49</td></tr><tr><td>Total revenue</td><td>$11,287</td><td>$8,512</td><td>$7,595</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td> (Millions of Dollars)</td><td> 2004</td><td></td><td> 2003</td><td></td><td>Increase/ (Decrease)</td></tr><tr><td>Property taxes</td><td>$29</td><td></td><td>$28</td><td></td><td>$1</td></tr><tr><td>State and local taxes related to revenue receipts</td><td>15</td><td></td><td>19</td><td></td><td>-4</td></tr><tr><td>Payroll taxes</td><td>4</td><td></td><td>4</td><td></td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Other taxes</td><td>-</td><td></td><td>(1</td><td>)(b)</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td> Total</td><td>$48</td><td> (a)</td><td>$50</td><td> (a)</td><td>$-2</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td> (millions of dollars)</td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td><td>Variance 2012 vs. 2011</td><td>2010</td><td>Variance 2011 vs. 2010</td></tr><tr><td>Operating activities</td><td>$2,599</td><td>$3,137</td><td>$-538</td><td>$2,381</td><td>$756</td></tr><tr><td>Investing activities</td><td>-2,523</td><td>-2,150</td><td>-373</td><td>-2,175</td><td>25</td></tr><tr><td>Financing activities</td><td>-330</td><td>-677</td><td>347</td><td>-128</td><td>-549</td></tr><tr><td>Net change</td><td>-254</td><td>310</td><td>-564</td><td>78</td><td>232</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at beginning of period</td><td>648</td><td>338</td><td>310</td><td>260</td><td>78</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at end of period</td><td>$394</td><td>$648</td><td>$-254</td><td>$338</td><td>$310</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">For the Year Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td>(Millions of Dollars)</td><td>2012</td><td>2013</td><td>2014</td><td>2015</td><td>2016</td></tr><tr><td>Operating revenues</td><td>$10,187</td><td>$10,430</td><td>$10,786</td><td>$10,328</td><td>$10,165</td></tr><tr><td>Energy costs</td><td>2,665</td><td>2,873</td><td>2,985</td><td>2,304</td><td>2,059</td></tr><tr><td>Operating income</td><td>2,093</td><td>2,060</td><td>2,139</td><td>2,247</td><td>2,262</td></tr><tr><td>Net income</td><td>1,014</td><td>1,020</td><td>1,058</td><td>1,084</td><td>1,056</td></tr><tr><td>Total assets (e)(f)</td><td>36,630</td><td>36,095(a)</td><td>39,443(b)</td><td>40,230(c)</td><td>40,856(d)</td></tr><tr><td>Long-term debt (e)</td><td>9,083</td><td>9,303</td><td>10,788</td><td>10,787</td><td>12,073</td></tr><tr><td>Shareholder’s equity</td><td>10,552</td><td>10,847</td><td>11,188</td><td>11,415</td><td>11,829</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">Year Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2014</td><td>2015</td><td>2016</td><td>2017</td><td>2018</td></tr><tr><td>Gas Delivered(MDt)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Firm sales</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Full service</td><td>9,529</td><td>9,348</td><td>9,723</td><td>10,480</td><td>12,050</td></tr><tr><td>Firm transportation</td><td>12,592</td><td>11,752</td><td>10,381</td><td>9,873</td><td>9,950</td></tr><tr><td>Total Firm Sales</td><td>22,121</td><td>21,100</td><td>20,104</td><td>20,353</td><td>22,000</td></tr><tr><td>Interruptible sales</td><td>4,216</td><td>4,205</td><td>3,853</td><td>3,771</td><td>3,746</td></tr><tr><td>Total Gas Delivered to O&R Customers</td><td>26,337</td><td>25,305</td><td>23,957</td><td>24,124</td><td>25,746</td></tr><tr><td>Transportation of customer-owned gas</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Sales for resale</td><td>945</td><td>906</td><td>867</td><td>896</td><td>959</td></tr><tr><td>Sales to electric generating stations</td><td>70</td><td>25</td><td>18</td><td>9</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Off-system sales</td><td>3</td><td>62</td><td>16</td><td>6</td><td>15</td></tr><tr><td>Total Sales</td><td>27,355</td><td>26,298</td><td>24,858</td><td>25,035</td><td>26,721</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">Year Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2014</td><td>2015</td><td>2016</td><td>2017</td><td>2018</td></tr><tr><td>Gas Delivered($ in millions)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Firm sales</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Full service</td><td>$121</td><td>$91</td><td>$99</td><td>$139</td><td>$166</td></tr><tr><td>Firm transportation</td><td>75</td><td>68</td><td>70</td><td>74</td><td>78</td></tr><tr><td>Total Firm Sales</td><td>196</td><td>159</td><td>169</td><td>213</td><td>244</td></tr><tr><td>Interruptible Sales</td><td>2</td><td>3</td><td>3</td><td>7</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>Total Gas Delivered to O&R Customers</td><td>198</td><td>162</td><td>172</td><td>220</td><td>250</td></tr><tr><td>Transportation of customer-owned gas</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Sales to electric generating stations</td><td>1</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Other operating revenues</td><td>13</td><td>20</td><td>12</td><td>12</td><td>-1</td></tr><tr><td>Total Sales</td><td>$212</td><td>$182</td><td>$184</td><td>$232</td><td>$249</td></tr><tr><td>Average Revenue Per Dt Sold</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Residential</td><td>$13.01</td><td>$10.11</td><td>$10.71</td><td>$13.86</td><td>$14.22</td></tr><tr><td>General</td><td>$11.30</td><td>$8.24</td><td>$8.17</td><td>$11.08</td><td>$11.80</td></tr></table>

Question: What is the ratio of all elements that are smaller than 100 to the sum of elements in 2015?
Answer: 0.28485
Reasoning program: add(91,68), add(#0,3), add(#1,20), add(#2,10.11), add(#3,8.24), add(91,68), add(#5,3), add(#6,20), add(#7,10.11), add(#8,8.24), add(#9,159), add(#10,162), add(#11,182), divide(#4,#12)