In April 2009, the FASB issued additional guidance under ASC 820 which provides guidance on estimating the fair value of an asset or liability (financial or nonfinancial) when the volume and level of activity for the asset or liability have significantly decreased, and on identifying transactions that are not orderly.
The application of the requirements of this guidance did not have a material effect on the accompanying consolidated financial statements.
In August 2009, the FASB issued ASU 2009-05, “Measuring Liabilities at Fair Value,” which further amends ASC 820 by providing clarification for circumstances in which a quoted price in an active market for the identical liability is not available.
The Company included the disclosures required by this guidance in the accompanying consolidated financial statements.
ACCOUNTING FOR UNCERTAINTY IN INCOME TAXES In June 2006, the FASB issued guidance under ASC 740, “Income Taxes” (formerly FIN 48).
This guidance prescribes a recognition threshold and measurement attribute for the financial statement recognition and measurement of a tax position taken or expected to be taken in tax returns.
Specifically, the financial statement effects of a tax position may be recognized only when it is determined that it is “more likely than not” that, based on its technical merits, the tax position will be sustained upon examination by the relevant tax authority.
The amount recognized shall be measured as the largest amount of tax benefits that exceed a 50% probability of being recognized.
This guidance also expands income tax disclosure requirements.
International Paper applied the provisions of this guidance beginning in the first quarter of 2007.
The adoption of this guidance resulted in a charge to the beginning balance of retained earnings of $94 million at the date of adoption.
NOTE 3 INDUSTRY SEGMENT INFORMATION Financial information by industry segment and geographic area for 2009, 2008 and 2007 is presented on pages 47 and 48.
Effective January 1, 2008, the Company changed its method of allocating corporate overhead expenses to its business segments to increase the expense amounts allocated to these businesses in reports reviewed by its chief executive officer to facilitate performance comparisons with other companies.
Accordingly, the Company has revised its presentation of industry segment operating profit to reflect this change in allocation method, and has adjusted all comparative prior period information on this basis.
NOTE 4 EARNINGS PER SHARE ATTRIBUTABLE TO INTERNATIONAL PAPER COMPANY COMMON SHAREHOLDERS Basic earnings per common share from continuing operations are computed by dividing earnings from continuing operations by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding.
Diluted earnings per common share from continuing operations are computed assuming that all potentially dilutive securities, including “in-the-money” stock options, were converted into common shares at the beginning of each year.
In addition, the computation of diluted earnings per share reflects the inclusion of contingently convertible securities in periods when dilutive.
A reconciliation of the amounts included in the computation of basic earnings per common share from continuing operations, and diluted earnings per common share from continuing operations is as follows:
## Table 0 ##
(a) Securities are not included in the table in periods when antidilutive.
(b) Options to purchase 22.2 million, 25.1 million and 17.5 million shares for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively, were not included in the computation of diluted common shares outstanding because their exercise price exceeded the average market price of the Company’s common stock for each respective reporting date.
NOTE 5 RESTRUCTURING AND OTHER CHARGES This footnote discusses restructuring and other charges recorded for each of the three years included in the period ended December 31, 2009.
It
Credit Quality and the Allowance for Loan Losses For a description of the accounting policies related to the allowance for loan losses, see “Item 7.
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Critical Accounting Policies” and “Item 8.
Consolidated Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Significant Accounting Policies—Loans—Allowance for Loan Losses.
” The following table presents an analysis of the allowance for loan losses for the past five years:
## Table 1 ##
The following table displays the allocation of the allowance for loan losses among specific classes of loans.
## Table 2 ##
The allowance for loan losses is allocated based on a historical loan loss formula allocation for similarly risk-rated loans, or for specific risk issues, which suggest a probable loss factor exceeding the historical loan loss formula allocation for a specific loan, or for individual impaired loans as determined by SFAS No.114.
The allowance for loan losses totaled $64.5 million at December 31, 2003, a decrease of $6.0 million, or 8.5%, as compared to $70.5 million at December 31, 2002.
Our improved credit quality necessitated a decrease in the allowance for loan losses.
This decrease was due to net recoveries of $0.2 million and a provision for loan losses of $(6.2) million.
Our loan recoveries in 2003 included settlement of the remaining film loan litigation.
The 2003 net recovery amount was composed of $20.1 million in gross charge-offs and $20.4 million in gross recoveries.
The allowance for loan losses totaled $70.5 million at December 31, 2002, a decrease of $1.9 million, or 2.6%, as compared to $72.4 million at December 31, 2001.
This decrease was due to net charge-offs of $5.8 million and a provision for loan losses of $3.9 million.
Our loan recoveries in 2002 primarily related
SILICON VALLEY BANCSHARES AND SUBSIDIARIES NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) 20.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements, Guarantees, and Other Commitments (Continued) Obligation Under Guarantees The Company provides guarantees related to financial and performance standby letters of credit.
The table below summarizes the Company’s standby letter of credits at December 31, 2003.
The maximum potential amount of future payments represents the amount that could be lost under the standby letter of credits if there were a total default by the guaranteed parties, without consideration of possible recoveries under recourse provisions or from the collateral held or pledged.

Tables referenced above, in order (Table 0 first):
<table><tr><td><i>In millions except per share amounts</i></td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td><td>2007</td></tr><tr><td>Earnings (loss) from continuing operations</td><td>$663</td><td>$-1,269</td><td>$1,215</td></tr><tr><td>Effect of dilutive securities (a)</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>–</td></tr><tr><td>Earnings (loss) from continuing operations – assumingdilution</td><td>$663</td><td>$-1,269</td><td>$1,215</td></tr><tr><td>Average common shares outstanding</td><td>425.3</td><td>421.0</td><td>428.9</td></tr><tr><td>Effect of dilutive securities Restricted performance share plan (a)</td><td>2.7</td><td>–</td><td>3.7</td></tr><tr><td>Stock options (b)</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>0.4</td></tr><tr><td>Average common shares outstanding – assuming dilution</td><td>428.0</td><td>421.0</td><td>433.0</td></tr><tr><td>Basic earnings (loss) per common share from continuing operations</td><td>$1.56</td><td>$-3.02</td><td>$2.83</td></tr><tr><td>Diluted earnings (loss) per common share from continuing operations</td><td>$1.55</td><td>$-3.02</td><td>$2.81</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td> </td><td>2003</td><td>2002</td><td>2001</td><td>2000</td><td>1999</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td colspan="5">(Dollars in thousands)</td></tr><tr><td>Balance beginning of year</td><td>$70,500</td><td>$72,375</td><td>$73,800</td><td>$71,800</td><td>$46,000</td></tr><tr><td>Charge-offs:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Commercial</td><td>-18,888</td><td>-27,408</td><td>-37,671</td><td>-63,177</td><td>-34,312</td></tr><tr><td>Real estate</td><td>-1,252</td><td>—</td><td>-690</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Consumer and other</td><td>—</td><td>-524</td><td>-424</td><td>-203</td><td>-196</td></tr><tr><td>Total charge-offs</td><td>-20,140</td><td>-27,932</td><td>-38,785</td><td>-63,380</td><td>-34,508</td></tr><tr><td>Recoveries:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Commercial</td><td>19,965</td><td>22,175</td><td>20,408</td><td>10,507</td><td>7,849</td></tr><tr><td>Real estate</td><td>331</td><td>—</td><td>209</td><td>47</td><td>34</td></tr><tr><td>Consumer and other</td><td>67</td><td>—</td><td>19</td><td>224</td><td>18</td></tr><tr><td>Total recoveries</td><td>20,363</td><td>22,175</td><td>20,636</td><td>10,778</td><td>7,901</td></tr><tr><td>Net recoveries (charge-offs)</td><td>223</td><td>-5,757</td><td>-18,149</td><td>-52,602</td><td>-26,607</td></tr><tr><td>Provision for loan losses</td><td>-6,223</td><td>3,882</td><td>16,724</td><td>54,602</td><td>52,407</td></tr><tr><td>Balance end of year</td><td>$64,500</td><td>$70,500</td><td>$72,375</td><td>$73,800</td><td>$71,800</td></tr><tr><td>Net recoveries (charge-offs) to average total loans</td><td>0.0%</td><td>-0.3%</td><td>-1.1%</td><td>-3.3%</td><td>-1.7%</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td> </td><td colspan="10"> December 31,</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td colspan="2"> 2003</td><td colspan="2"> 2002</td><td colspan="2"> 2001</td><td colspan="2"> 2000</td><td colspan="2"> 1999</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> Amount</td><td> Percent of Total Loans</td><td> Amount</td><td> Percent of Total Loans</td><td> Amount</td><td> Percent of Total Loans</td><td> Amount</td><td> Percent of Total Loans</td><td> Amount</td><td> Percent of Total Loans</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td colspan="10"> (Dollars in thousands)</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial</td><td>$56,085</td><td>87.1%</td><td>$58,702</td><td>83.8%</td><td>$65,972</td><td>92.3%</td><td>$54,300</td><td>92.7%</td><td>$49,985</td><td>95.5%</td></tr><tr><td>Real estate construction</td><td>593</td><td>0.9</td><td>1,016</td><td>1.4</td><td>1,062</td><td>1.5</td><td>1,141</td><td>1.9</td><td>792</td><td>1.5</td></tr><tr><td>Real estate term</td><td>2,311</td><td>3.6</td><td>6,879</td><td>9.8</td><td>2,528</td><td>3.5</td><td>806</td><td>1.4</td><td>795</td><td>1.5</td></tr><tr><td>Consumer and other</td><td>5,371</td><td>8.4</td><td>3,474</td><td>5.0</td><td>1,959</td><td>2.7</td><td>2,350</td><td>4.0</td><td>757</td><td>1.5</td></tr><tr><td>Unallocated</td><td>140</td><td>N/A</td><td>429</td><td>N/A</td><td>854</td><td>N/A</td><td>15,203</td><td>N/A</td><td>19,471</td><td>N/A</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$64,500</td><td>100.0%</td><td>$70,500</td><td>100.0%</td><td>$72,375</td><td>100.0%</td><td>$73,800</td><td>100.0%</td><td>$71,800</td><td>100.0%</td></tr></table>

Question: What is the sum of the Real estate term for Amount in the years where Commercial for Amount is positive? (in thousand)
Answer: 13319
Reasoning program: add(2311,6879), add(#0,2528), add(#1,806), add(#2,795)