CITIZENS FINANCIAL GROUP, INC.  MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS 73 The following table presents the composition of loans and leases, including non-core loans, as of:
## Table 0 ##
(1) During first quarter 2017, student loans were renamed “education” loans.
For further information see Note 1 “Basis of Presentation” to our audited Consolidated Financial Statements in Part II, Item 8 - Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, included in this report.
Total loans and leases of $110.6 billion as of December 31, 2017, increased $2.9 billion, or 3%, from $107.7 billion as of December 31, 2016, reflecting growth in commercial and retail products.
Total commercial loans and leases of $52.0 billion increased $380 million, or 1%, from $51.7 billion as of December 31, 2016, reflecting commercial loan growth of $288 million and commercial real estate loan growth of $684 million, partially offset by the decline of $592 million in leases.
The change in commercial loans also reflected the impact of the second quarter 2017 sale of $596 million of lower-return, non-strategic commercial loans and leases associated with balance sheet optimization initiatives.
Total retail loans of $58.6 billion increased $2.6 billion, or 5%, from $56.0 billion as of December 31, 2016, largely driven by a $1.5 billion increase in education loans and a $1.9 billion increase in residential mortgages, partially offset by lower home equity and auto balances.
Employee Stock Purchase Plan—During 2015, 2014 and 2013, participants of the ESPP purchased 18,132, 20,368 and 20,211 shares, respectively, of Roper’s common stock for total consideration of $2.9 million, $2.8 million, and $2.4 million, respectively.
All of these shares were purchased from Roper’s treasury shares.
The Company had no compensation expense relating to the stock purchase plan during 2015, 2014 and 2013.
(12) CONTINGENCIES Roper, in the ordinary course of business, is the subject of, or a party to, various pending or threatened legal actions, including product liability and employment practices.
It is vigorously contesting all lawsuits that, in general, are based upon claims of the kind that have been customary over the past several years.
After analyzing the Company’s contingent liabilities on a gross basis and, based upon past experience with resolution of its product liability and employment practices claims and the limits of the primary, excess, and umbrella liability insurance coverages that are available with respect to pending claims, management believes that adequate provision has been made to cover any potential liability not covered by insurance.
The ultimate liability, if any, arising from these actions should not have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows of Roper.
Roper or its subsidiaries have been named defendants along with numerous industrial companies in asbestos-related litigation claims in certain U. S.  states.
No significant resources have been required by Roper to respond to these cases and Roper believes it has valid defenses to such claims and, if required, intends to defend them vigorously.
Given the state of these claims it is not possible to determine the potential liability, if any.
Roper’s rent expense was $40.2 million, $38.4 million and $39.8 million for 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively.
Roper’s future minimum property lease commitments are as follows (in millions):
## Table 1 ##
A summary of the Company’s warranty accrual activity is presented below (in thousands):
## Table 2 ##
Other included warranty balances at acquired businesses at the dates of acquisition, the effects of foreign currency translation adjustments, reclassifications and other.
As of December 31, 2015, Roper had $43 million of letters of credit issued to guarantee its performance under certain services contracts or to support certain insurance programs and $505 million of outstanding surety bonds.
Certain contracts, primarily those involving public sector customers, require Roper to provide a surety bond as a guarantee of its performance of contractual obligations.
(13) SEGMENT AND GEOGRAPHIC AREA INFORMATION Roper’s operations are reported in four segments around common customers, markets, sales channels, technologies and common cost opportunities.
The segments are: Medical & Scientific Imaging, RF Technology, Industrial Technology and Energy Systems & Controls.
The Medical & Scientific Imaging segment offers medical products and software, high performance digital imaging products and software.
The RF Technology segment includes products and systems related to comprehensive toll and traffic systems and processing, security and access control, campus card systems, card readers, software-as-a-service applications in the freight matching and food industries, comprehensive business software for legal and construction firms and utility metering and remote monitoring applications.
Products included within the Industrial Technology segment are water and fluid handling pumps, flow measurement and metering equipment, industrial valves and controls, materials analysis equipment and consumables and industrial leak testing.
The Energy Systems & Controls segment’s products include control systems, equipment and consumables for fluid properties testing, vibration sensors and other non-destructive inspection and measurement products and services.
Roper’s management structure and internal reporting are aligned consistently with these four segments.
year ended December 31, 2017 compared to what it would have been under the previous accounting rules.
In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-09 – Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606).
This ASU provides a five-step model for revenue recognition that all industries will apply to recognize revenue when a customer obtains control of a good or service.
This ASU will be effective for us beginning January 1, 2018.
Entities are permitted to apply the standard and related amendments either retrospectively to each prior reporting period presented or retrospectively with the cumulative effect of initially applying the ASU recognized at the date of initial application.
We have completed our assessment of this ASU.
Based upon our assessment, there will not be a material change to the timing of our revenue recognition.
However, we will be required to reclassify certain immaterial costs from selling, general and administrative (“SG&A”) expense to net sales, which will result in a reduction of net sales, but have no impact on operating profit.
We will adopt this new standard using the retrospective method, which will result in us restating prior reporting periods presented.
In March 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-07 – Improving the Presentation of Net Periodic Pension Cost and Net Periodic Postretirement Benefit Cost.
This ASU requires us to report the service cost component of pensions in the same location as other compensation costs arising from services rendered by the pertinent employees during the period.
We will be required to report the other components of net benefit costs in Other Income (Expense) in the statement of earnings.
This ASU will be effective for us beginning January 1, 2018.
The ASU must be applied retrospectively for the presentation of the service cost component and the other components of net periodic pension cost in the statement of earnings and prospectively, on and after the effective date, for the capitalization of the service cost component of net periodic pension cost in assets.
See Note 14 for further information on the components of our net benefit cost.
In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02 – Leases.
This ASU requires lessees to recognize right-of-use assets and lease liabilities on the balance sheet.
This ASU will be effective for us beginning January 1, 2019.
Early adoption is permitted.
Based on current guidance, this ASU must be adopted using a modified retrospective transition approach at the beginning of the earliest comparative period in the consolidated financial statements.
We own most of our manufacturing facilities, but lease various office space and other less significant assets throughout the world.
We have formed our project team and have begun a process to collect the necessary information to implement this ASU.
We will continue evaluating our leases and the related impact this ASU will have on our consolidated financial statements throughout 2018.
In August 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-12 – Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities.
This ASU amends the hedge accounting guidance to simplify the application of hedge accounting, makes more financial and nonfinancial hedging strategies eligible for hedge accounting treatment, changes how companies assess effectiveness and updates presentation and disclosure requirements.
We are currently evaluating the impact this ASU will have on our consolidated financial statements; however, based on our current hedging portfolio, we do not anticipate that this ASU will have a significant impact on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
This ASU will be effective for us January 1, 2019, with early adoption permitted.
After adoption, we may explore new hedging opportunities that are eligible for hedge accounting treatment under the new standard.
There are no other recently issued accounting pronouncements that we have not yet adopted that are expected to have a material effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.3.  Business Combinations Biomet Merger We completed our merger with LVB, the parent company of Biomet, on June 24, 2015.
We paid $12,030.3 million in cash and stock and assumed Biomet’s senior notes.
The total amount of merger consideration utilized for the acquisition method of accounting, as reduced by the merger consideration paid to holders of unvested LVB stock options and LVB stockbased awards of $90.4 million, was $11,939.9 million.
The following table sets forth unaudited pro forma financial information derived from (i) the audited financial statements of Zimmer for the year ended December 31, 2015; and (ii) the unaudited financial statements of LVB for the period January 1, 2015 to June 23, 2015.
The pro forma financial information has been adjusted to give effect to the merger as if it had occurred on January 1, 2014.
Pro Forma Financial Information (Unaudited)

Tables referenced above, in order (Table 0 first):
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">December 31,</td><td colspan="2">Change from 2017-2016</td></tr><tr><td>(in millions)</td><td>2017</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td><td>$</td><td>%</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial</td><td>$37,562</td><td>$37,274</td><td>$33,264</td><td>$31,431</td><td>$28,667</td><td>$288</td><td>1%</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial real estate</td><td>11,308</td><td>10,624</td><td>8,971</td><td>7,809</td><td>6,948</td><td>684</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>Leases</td><td>3,161</td><td>3,753</td><td>3,979</td><td>3,986</td><td>3,780</td><td>-592</td><td>-16</td></tr><tr><td>Total commercial loans and leases</td><td>52,031</td><td>51,651</td><td>46,214</td><td>43,226</td><td>39,395</td><td>380</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Residential mortgages</td><td>17,045</td><td>15,115</td><td>13,318</td><td>11,832</td><td>9,726</td><td>1,930</td><td>13</td></tr><tr><td>Home equity loans</td><td>1,392</td><td>1,858</td><td>2,557</td><td>3,424</td><td>4,301</td><td>-466</td><td>-25</td></tr><tr><td>Home equity lines of credit</td><td>13,483</td><td>14,100</td><td>14,674</td><td>15,423</td><td>15,667</td><td>-617</td><td>-4</td></tr><tr><td>Home equity loans serviced by others</td><td>542</td><td>750</td><td>986</td><td>1,228</td><td>1,492</td><td>-208</td><td>-28</td></tr><tr><td>Home equity lines of credit serviced by others</td><td>149</td><td>219</td><td>389</td><td>550</td><td>679</td><td>-70</td><td>-32</td></tr><tr><td>Automobile</td><td>13,204</td><td>13,938</td><td>13,828</td><td>12,706</td><td>9,397</td><td>-734</td><td>-5</td></tr><tr><td>Education<sup>-1</sup></td><td>8,134</td><td>6,610</td><td>4,359</td><td>2,256</td><td>2,208</td><td>1,524</td><td>23</td></tr><tr><td>Credit cards</td><td>1,848</td><td>1,691</td><td>1,634</td><td>1,693</td><td>1,691</td><td>157</td><td>9</td></tr><tr><td>Other retail</td><td>2,789</td><td>1,737</td><td>1,083</td><td>1,072</td><td>1,303</td><td>1,052</td><td>61</td></tr><tr><td>Total retail loans</td><td>58,586</td><td>56,018</td><td>52,828</td><td>50,184</td><td>46,464</td><td>2,568</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>Total loans and leases</td><td>$110,617</td><td>$107,669</td><td>$99,042</td><td>$93,410</td><td>$85,859</td><td>$2,948</td><td>3%</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>2016</td><td>$36.7</td></tr><tr><td>2017</td><td>31.1</td></tr><tr><td>2018</td><td>20.6</td></tr><tr><td>2019</td><td>14.3</td></tr><tr><td>2020</td><td>11.6</td></tr><tr><td>Thereafter</td><td>32.5</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$146.8</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td></tr><tr><td>Balance, beginning of year</td><td>$9,537</td><td>$14,336</td><td>$9,755</td></tr><tr><td>Additions charged to costs and expenses</td><td>14,284</td><td>13,396</td><td>20,387</td></tr><tr><td>Deductions</td><td>-13,059</td><td>-18,078</td><td>-15,697</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>-579</td><td>-117</td><td>-109</td></tr><tr><td>Balance, end of year</td><td>$10,183</td><td>$9,537</td><td>$14,336</td></tr></table>

Question: What was the average of the Commercial and Commercial real estate in the years where Total retail loans is positive? (in million)
Answer: 24435
Reasoning program: add(37562,11308), divide(#0,const_2)