The following table sets forth information concerning increases in the total number of our AAP stores during the past five years:
## Table 0 ##
(1) Does not include stores that opened as relocations of previously existing stores within the same general market area or substantial renovations of stores.
Store Technology.
Our store-based information systems are comprised of a proprietary and integrated Point of Sale, electronic parts catalog, or EPC, and store-level inventory management system (collectively "store system").
Information maintained by our store system is used to formulate pricing, marketing and merchandising strategies and to replenish inventory accurately and rapidly.
Our fully integrated system enables our store Team Members to assist our customers in their parts selection and ordering based on the year, make, model and engine type of their vehicles.
Our store system provides real-time inventory tracking at the store level allowing store Team Members to check the quantity of on-hand inventory for any SKU, adjust stock levels for select items for store specific events, automatically process returns and defective merchandise, designate SKUs for cycle counts and track merchandise transfers.
If a hard-to-find part or accessory is not available at one of our stores, the store system can determine whether the part is carried and in-stock through our HUB or PDQ?
networks or can be ordered directly from one of our vendors.
Available parts and accessories are then ordered electronically from another store, HUB, PDQ?
or directly from the vendor with immediate confirmation of price, availability and estimated delivery time.
Our centrally-based EPC data management system enables us to reduce the time needed to (i) exchange data with our vendors and (ii) catalog and deliver updated, accurate parts information.
We also support our store operations with additional proprietary systems and customer driven labor scheduling capabilities.
All of these systems are tightly integrated and provide real-time, comprehensive information to store personnel, resulting in improved customer service levels, Team Member productivity and in-stock availability.
We plan to start rolling out a new and enhanced EPC in Fiscal 2013 which is expected to simplify and improve the customer experience.
Among the improvements is a more efficient way to systematically identify add-on sales to ensure our customers have what they need to complete their automotive repair project.
Store Support Center Merchandising.
Purchasing for virtually all of the merchandise for our stores is handled by our merchandise teams located in three primary locations: ?
Store support center in Roanoke, Virginia; ?
Regional office in Minneapolis, Minnesota; and ?
Global sourcing office in Taipei, Taiwan.
Our Roanoke team is primarily responsible for the parts categories and our Minnesota team is primarily responsible for accessories, oil and chemicals.
Our global sourcing team works closely with both teams.
In Fiscal 2012, we purchased merchandise from approximately 450 vendors, with no single vendor accounting for more than 9% of purchases.
Our purchasing strategy involves negotiating agreements with most of our vendors to purchase merchandise over a specified period of time along with other terms, including pricing, payment terms and volume.
The merchandising team has developed strong vendor relationships in the industry and, in a collaborative effort with our vendor partners, utilizes a category management process where we manage the mix of our product offerings to meet customer demand.
We believe this process, which develops a customer-focused business plan for each merchandise category, and our global sourcing operation are critical to improving comparable store sales, gross margin and inventory productivity.
customers and increased gas unit costs in 2003.
The increase is offset in part by increased volumes of gas purchased from other suppliers by participants in O&R’s retail access program.
See “Recoverable Energy Costs” in Note A to the financial statements.
Gas operating income increased $2 million in 2003 as compared with 2002.
The increase reflects an increase in net gas revenues (operating revenues less purchased gas) of $7 million, which is due primarily to increased sales and the referenced regulatory actions.
The increase in net revenues was offset in part by increased gas operations and maintenance expenses of $2 million and increased federal and state income tax of $3 million.
Taxes Other Than Income Taxes Taxes other than income taxes decreased $2 million in 2003 compared with 2002.
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, (a) billed to customers in 2003 and 2002 were $69 and $71 million, respectively.
(b) Includes a sales and use tax refund of approximately $800,000.
Income Taxes Operating income taxes increased by $9 million in 2003 compared with 2002 due primarily to the result of less flowthrough (non-deferred) depreciation for tax purposes.
Other Income O&R’s other income (deductions) decreased $3 million in 2003 compared with 2002, due primarily to the reclassification to other income (deductions) of losses previously recognized in other comprehensive income related to investments in marketable securities.
Net Interest Charges O&R’s net interest charges decreased by $7 million in 2003 compared with 2002, due primarily to the company recording interest charges of $5 million in 2002 as a result of a change by the NJBPU in the carrying charges allowed on the company’s deferred purchased power balance in New Jersey and to lower interest on long-term debt as a result of the redemption of a $35 million, 10-year debenture in March 2003 (see “Liquidity and Capital Resources,” above).
Unregulated Subsidiaries and Other Unregulated subsidiaries’ operating income for 2003 was $122 million lower than 2002.
Operating revenues increased $292 million in 2003 compared with 2002 due primarily to higher sales from Con Edison Development’s increased generating capacity and increased retail electric sales at Con Edison Solutions.
Unregulated subsidiaries’ operating expenses, excluding income taxes, increased by $502 million, reflecting principally increased fuel and purchased power costs of $260 million, impairment charges of $159 million and increased operation and maintenance expenses of $83 million.
See Note H to the financial statements.
The increase in operation and maintenance expenses was attributable to increased costs at Con Edison Development ($51 million), primarily to operate the new generation assets, Con Edison Communications’ increased operating costs reflecting expansion of the business ($23 million), and higher depreciation for additional telecommunications facilities and generating assets placed in service ($13 million), offset in part by lower operation and maintenance costs at Con Edison Solutions ($6 million).
Operating income taxes decreased $88 million for 2003 as compared with 2002 reflecting primarily lower taxable income (including the tax-effect of the aforementioned impairment charges).
Unregulated subsidiaries’ other income (deductions) increased $1 million and interest charges were lower by $1 million for 2003 as compared with 2002.
Unregulated subsidiaries’ earnings reflect an increase of $25 million for 2003 as compared with 2002 resulting from the cumulative effect of changes in accounting principles adopted in each year.
For 2003, the positive cumulative effect of changes in accounting principles of $3 million (after tax) at Con Edison Development related to mark-to-market gains applicable to power sales contracts at certain generating plants, partially offset by the impact of the financial statement consolidation of its Newington plant.
For 2002, the cumulative effect of changes in accounting principles included charges for goodwill impairment of certain generating assets at Con Edison Development, totaling $20 million (after tax), and a charge of $2 million (after tax) at Con Edison Energy relating to the accounting for certain contracts involved in energy trading and risk management activities.
Earnings attributable to Other, representing the parent company and inter-company transactions, were $9 million lower for 2003 as compared with 2002 primarily reflecting higher interest expenses.
Notes to the Financial Statements — Continued The Utilities have issued $269 million of tax-exempt debt through the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) that currently bear interest at a rate determined weekly and is subject to tender by bondholders for purchase by the Utilities.
In 2010, CECONY issued $225 million of tax-exempt debt that is subject to mandatory tender in 2012.
The carrying amounts and fair values of long-term debt are:
## Table 2 ##
Fair values of long-term debt have been estimated primarily using available market information.
At December 31, 2010 and 2009, long-term debt of Con Edison included $32 million and $34 million, respectively, of Transition Bonds issued in 2004 by O&R’s New Jersey utility subsidiary through a special purpose entity.
Significant Debt Covenants The significant debt covenants under the financing arrangements for the notes of Con Edison and the debentures of CECONY are obligations to pay principal and interest when due, covenants not to consolidate with or merge into any other corporation unless certain conditions are met and, for Con Edison’s notes, covenants that Con Edison shall continue its utility business in New York City and shall not permit Con Edison’s ratio of consolidated debt to consolidated capital to exceed 0.675 to 1.
Con Edison’s notes are also subject to cross default provisions with respect to other indebtedness of Con Edison or its material subsidiaries having a then outstanding principal balance in excess of $100 million.
CECONY’s debentures have no cross default provisions.
The tax-exempt financing arrangements of the Utilities are subject to covenants for the CECONY debentures discussed above and the covenants discussed below.
The Companies believe that they were in compliance with their significant debt covenants at December 31, 2010.
The tax-exempt financing arrangements involved the issuance of uncollateralized promissory notes of the Utilities to NYSERDA in exchange for the net proceeds of a like amount of tax-exempt bonds with substantially the same terms sold to the public by NYSERDA.
The tax-exempt financing arrangements include covenants with respect to the tax-exempt status of the financing, including covenants with respect to the use of the facilities financed.
The arrangements include provisions for the maintenance of liquidity and credit facilities, the failure to comply with which would, except as otherwise provided, constitute an event of default with respect to the debt to which such provisions applied.
The failure to comply with debt covenants would, except as otherwise provided, constitute an event of default with respect to the debt to which such provisions applied.
If an event of default were to occur, the principal and accrued interest on the debt to which such event of default applied and, in the case of the Con Edison notes, a make-whole premium might and, in the case of certain events of default would, become due and payable immediately.
The liquidity and credit facilities currently in effect for the tax-exempt financing include covenants that the ratio of debt to total capital of the obligated utility will not at any time exceed 0.65 to 1 and that, subject to certain exceptions, the utility will not mortgage, lien, pledge or otherwise encumber its assets.
Certain of the facilities also include as events of default, defaults in payments of other debt obligations in excess of specified levels ($100 million for CECONY).
Note D — Short-Term Borrowing In June 2006, Con Edison and the Utilities entered into an Amended and Restated Credit Agreement (Credit Agreement) under which banks are committed to provide loans and letters of credit, on a revolving credit basis.
In June 2007, the Credit Agreement, which was to expire in June 2011, was extended for an additional year.
Under the Credit Agreement, there is a maximum of $2.25 billion ($2.2 billion in the additional year) of credit available, with the full amount available to CECONY and $1 billion available to Con Edison.
The Credit Agreement supports the Companies’ commercial paper programs.
The Companies have not borrowed under the Credit Agreement.
At December 31, 2010 and 2009, Con Edison and CECONY had no commercial paper outstanding.
The banks’ commitments under the Credit Agreement are subject to certain conditions, including that there be no event of default.
The commitments are not subject to maintenance of credit rating levels or the absence of a material adverse change.
Upon a change of control of, or upon an event of default by one of the Companies, the banks may terminate their commitments with respect to that company and declare any amounts owed by 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, 2010, this ratio was 0.49 to 1 for both Con Edison and CECONY); having liens on its assets in an aggregate amount exceeding 5 percent of its consolidated total capital,
M ANAGEMENT ’ S D ISCUSSION AND A NALYSIS OF F INANCIAL C ONDITION AND R ESULTS OF O PERATIONS – C ONTINUED Gas CECONY’s results of gas operations for the year ended December 31, 2011 compared with the year ended December 31, 2010 is as follows:
## Table 3 ##
CECONY’s gas sales and deliveries, excluding off-system sales, in 2011 compared with 2010 were
## Table 4 ##
(a) Includes 3,801 and 3,385 thousands of dths for 2011 and 2010, respectively, which are also reflected in firm transportation and oth CECONY’s gas operating revenues decreased $20 million in 2011 compared with 2010 due primarily to a decrease in gas purchased for resale costs ($56 million), offset in part by the gas rate plans ($41 million).
CECONY’s revenues from gas sales are subject to a weather normalization clause and a revenue decoupling mechanism as a result of which delivery revenues are generally not affected by changes in delivery volumes from levels assumed when rates were approved.
Other gas operating revenues generally reflect changes in regulatory assets and liabilities in accordance with the company’s rate plans.
See Note B to the financial statements in Item 8.
CECONY’s sales and transportation volumes for firm customers increased 3.1 percent in 2011 compared with 20 After adjusting for variations, principally weather and billing days, firm gas sales and transportation volumes in the company’s service area increased 2.1 percent in 2011.
CECONY’s purchased gas cost decreased $56 million in 2011 compared with 2010 due to lower unit costs ($39 million) and sendout volumes ($17 million).
CECONY’s gas operating income decreased $15 million in 2011 compared with 2010.
The decrease reflects primarily higher taxes other than income taxes ($23 million, principally property taxes), operations and maintenance expense ($20 million, due primarily to higher pension expense ($18 million)) and depreciation ($8 million), offset by higher net revenues ($36 million

Tables referenced above, in order (Table 0 first):
<table><tr><td></td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td></tr><tr><td>Beginning Stores</td><td>3,460</td><td>3,369</td><td>3,264</td><td>3,243</td><td>3,153</td></tr><tr><td>New Stores<sup>-1</sup></td><td>116</td><td>95</td><td>110</td><td>75</td><td>109</td></tr><tr><td>Stores Closed</td><td>—</td><td>-4</td><td>-5</td><td>-54</td><td>-19</td></tr><tr><td>Ending Stores</td><td>3,576</td><td>3,460</td><td>3,369</td><td>3,264</td><td>3,243</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td><i>(Millions of Dollars)</i></td><td><i>2003</i></td><td></td><td><i>2002</i></td><td>Increase/ (Decrease)</td></tr><tr><td>Property taxes</td><td>$28</td><td></td><td>$27</td><td>$1</td></tr><tr><td>State and local taxes related to revenue receipts</td><td>19</td><td></td><td>21</td><td>-2</td></tr><tr><td>Payroll taxes</td><td>4</td><td></td><td>4</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Other taxes</td><td>(1</td><td>)(b)</td><td>-</td><td>-1</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$50(a)</td><td></td><td>$52(a)</td><td>$-2</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="4"> December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2"> 2010<i></i> <i>(in millions)</i></td><td colspan="2"> 2009<i></i> <i>(in millions)</i></td></tr><tr><td> Long-Term Debt (including current portion)</td><td> Carrying Amount</td><td> Fair Value</td><td> Carrying Amount</td><td> Fair Value</td></tr><tr><td>Con Edison</td><td>$10,676</td><td>$11,795</td><td>$10,585</td><td>$11,009</td></tr><tr><td>CECONY</td><td>$9,743</td><td>$10,680</td><td>$9,663</td><td>$10,052</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2"> Twelve Months Ended</td><td></td></tr><tr><td> (millions of dollars)</td><td> December 31, 2011</td><td> December 31, 2010</td><td>Variation</td></tr><tr><td>Operating revenues</td><td>$1,521</td><td>$1,541</td><td>$-20</td></tr><tr><td>Gas purchased for resale</td><td>518</td><td>574</td><td>-56</td></tr><tr><td>Net revenues</td><td>1,003</td><td>967</td><td>36</td></tr><tr><td>Operations and maintenance</td><td>366</td><td>346</td><td>20</td></tr><tr><td>Depreciation and amortization</td><td>110</td><td>102</td><td>8</td></tr><tr><td>Taxes, other than income taxes</td><td>232</td><td>209</td><td>23</td></tr><tr><td> Gas operating income</td><td>$295</td><td>$310</td><td>$-15</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="4">Thousands of dths Delivered</td><td colspan="4">Revenues in Millions</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2"> Twelve Months Ended</td><td colspan="2"></td><td colspan="2">Twelve Months Ended</td><td colspan="2"></td></tr><tr><td> Description</td><td> December 31, 2011</td><td> December 31, 2010</td><td>Variation</td><td>Percent Variation</td><td>December 31, 2011</td><td>December 31, 2010</td><td>Variation</td><td>Percent Variation</td></tr><tr><td>Residential</td><td>38,160</td><td>37,963</td><td>197</td><td>0.5%</td><td>$704</td><td>$733</td><td>$-29</td><td>-4.0%</td></tr><tr><td>General</td><td>26,536</td><td>25,629</td><td>907</td><td>3.5</td><td>344</td><td>366</td><td>-22</td><td>-6.0</td></tr><tr><td>Firm transportation</td><td>54,291</td><td>51,859</td><td>2,432</td><td>4.7</td><td>356</td><td>347</td><td>9</td><td>2.6</td></tr><tr><td> Total firm sales and transportation</td><td> 118,987</td><td> 115,451</td><td>3,536</td><td>3.1</td><td>1,404</td><td>1,446</td><td>-42</td><td>-2.9</td></tr><tr><td>Interruptible sales (a)</td><td>10,035</td><td>8,521</td><td>1,514</td><td>17.8</td><td>75</td><td>60</td><td>15</td><td>25.0</td></tr><tr><td>NYPA</td><td>34,893</td><td>24,890</td><td>10,003</td><td>40.2</td><td>2</td><td>2</td><td>-</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Generation plants</td><td>75,207</td><td>78,880</td><td>-3,673</td><td>-4.7</td><td>32</td><td>36</td><td>-4</td><td>-11.1</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>21,956</td><td>20,786</td><td>1,170</td><td>5.6</td><td>52</td><td>51</td><td>1</td><td>2.0</td></tr><tr><td>Other operating revenues</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-44</td><td>-54</td><td>10</td><td>18.5</td></tr><tr><td> Total</td><td> 261,078</td><td> 248,528</td><td>12,550</td><td>5.0%</td><td>$1,521</td><td>$1,541</td><td>$-20</td><td>-1.3%</td></tr></table>

Question: what was the average annual creation of new stores for aap from 2008 to 2012?
Answer: 112.5
Reasoning program: add(116,109), divide(#0,const_2)