Loan-to-value and debt service coverage ratios are measures commonly used to assess the quality of commercial mortgage loans.
The loan-to-value ratio compares the amount of the loan to the fair value of the underlying property collateralizing the loan, and is commonly expressed as a percentage.
Loan-to-value ratios greater than 100% percent indicate that the loan amount is greater than the collateral value.
A smaller loan-to-value ratio indicates a greater excess of collateral value over the loan amount.
The debt service coverage ratio compares a property’s net operating income to its debt service payments.
Debt service coverage ratios less than 1.0 times indicate that property operations do not generate enough income to cover the loan’s current debt payments.
A larger debt service coverage ratio indicates a greater excess of net operating income over the debt service payments.
As of December 31, 2009, our general account investments in commercial mortgage loans attributable to the Financial Services Businesses had a weighted average debt service coverage ratio of 1.80 times, and a weighted average loan-to-value ratio of 65%.
As of December 31, 2009, approximately 96% of commercial mortgage loans attributable to the Financial Services Businesses were fixed rate loans.
As of December 31, 2009, our general account investments in commercial mortgage loans attributable to the Closed Block Business had a weighted average debt service coverage ratio of 1.88 times, and a weighted average loan-to-value ratio of 58%.
As of December 31, 2009, approximately 99% of commercial mortgage loans attributable to the Closed Block Business were fixed rate loans.
For those general account commercial mortgage loans attributable to the Financial Services Businesses that were originated in 2009, the weighted average loan-to-value ratio was 59%, and the weighted average debt service coverage ratio was 1.72 times.
The values utilized in calculating these loan-to-value ratios are developed as part of our periodic review of the commercial mortgage loan portfolio, which includes an internal evaluation of the underlying collateral value.
Our periodic review also includes a quality re-rating process, whereby we update the internal quality rating originally assigned at underwriting based on the proprietary quality rating system mentioned above.
As discussed below, the internal quality rating is a key input in determining our allowance for loan losses.
For loans with collateral under construction, renovation or lease-up, a stabilized value and projected net operating income are used in the calculation of the loan-to-value and debt service coverage ratios.
Our commercial mortgage loan portfolio attributable to the Financial Services Businesses included approximately $1.1 billion and $1.8 billion of such loans as of December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008, respectively, and our commercial mortgage loan portfolio attributable to the Closed Block Business included approximately $0.4 billion and $0.7 billion of such loans as of December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008, respectively.
All else being equal, these loans are inherently more risky than those collateralized by properties that have already stabilized.
As of December 31, 2009 there are $11 million and $2 million of loan-specific reserves related to these loans in the Financial Services Businesses and Closed Block Business, respectively.
In addition, these unstabilized loans are included in the calculation of our portfolio reserve as discussed below, For information regarding similar loans we hold as part of our commercial mortgage operations, see “—Invested Asset of Other Entities and Operations.
” The following tables set forth the gross carrying value of our general account investments in commercial mortgage loans attributable to the Financial Services Businesses and the Closed Block Business as of the dates indicated by loan-to-value and debt service coverage ratios.
Commercial Mortgage Loans by Loan-to-Value and Debt Service Coverage Ratios—Financial Services Businesses
## Table 0 ##
Commercial Mortgage Loans by Loan-to-Value and Debt Service Coverage Ratios—Closed Block Business
## Table 1 ##
PRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL, INC.  Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements 20.
FAIR VALUE OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES (continued) private mutual funds where the inputs used by the mutual funds were determined to be Level 3.
This activity was partially offset by transfers out of Level 3 as a result of the availability of third party pricing service information that was validated.
Transfers of Commercial Mortgage and Other Loans into Level 3 totaled $81 million and resulted from a reduction in the availability of market available prices during the year due to market illiquidity.
The net amount of Separate Account Assets transferred out of Level 3 for the year ended December 31, 2008 was $607 million.
This resulted from the use of vendor pricing information that the Company was able to validate that was previously unavailable.
Partially offsetting the transfers out for this activity were transfers into Level 3 as a result of further review of valuation methodologies for certain assets that had been previously classified as Level 2.
Nonrecurring Fair Value Measurements—Certain assets and liabilities are measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis.
Nonrecurring fair value reserve increases resulted in $200 million of losses being recorded for the year ended December 31, 2009 on certain commercial mortgage loans.
The carrying value of these loans as of December 31, 2009 was $331 million.
Similar commercial mortgage loan reserve increases of $36 million were recorded for the year ended December 31, 2008.
The reserves were based on either discounted cash flows utilizing market rates or the fair value of the underlying real estate collateral and were classified as Level 3 in the hierarchy.
In addition, losses of $38 million were recorded for the year ended December 31, 2008 related to commercial loans that were carried at the lower of cost or market.
The fair value measurements were classified as Level 3 in the valuation hierarchy.
The inputs utilized for these valuations are pricing indicators from the whole loan market, which the Company considers its principal market for these loans.
Impairments of $55 million and $26 million were recorded for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively, on certain cost method investments.
The carrying value as of December 31, 2009 of these investments was $218 million.
In addition, impairments of $12 million and $14 million were recorded for the year ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively, on certain equity method investments.
These fair value adjustments were based on inputs classified as Level 3 in the valuation hierarchy.
The inputs utilized were primarily discounted estimated future cash flows and, where appropriate, valuations provided by the general partners taken into consideration with deal and management fee expenses.
Impairments of $12 million for the year ended December 31, 2009 were recorded for mortgage servicing rights.
The impairments were based on internal models and were classified as Level 3 in the hierarchy.
In addition, impairments of $7 million for the year ended December 31, 2009 were recorded for real estate investments, some of which were classified as discontinued operations.
The impairments were based on appraisal values or purchase agreements and were classified as Level 3 in the hierarchy.
For the year ended December 31, 2008, the Company recorded impairments of $316 million on certain equity method investments in operating joint ventures held within the international investments segment.
The inputs used in determining these impairments were classified as Level 3 in the valuation hierarchy and consisted primarily of market multiples and discounted cash flows.
The carrying value of these equity method operating joint ventures as of December 31, 2008 was $281 million.
As discussed in more detail in Note 9, the Company recorded goodwill impairments of $337 million during the year ended December 31, 2008.
The inputs were classified as Level 3 and primarily consisted of discounted cash flows and market multiples.
Fair Value Option—The following table presents information regarding changes in fair values recorded in earnings for commercial mortgage loans and long-term debt, still held as of the reporting date, where the fair value option has been elected.
## Table 2 ##
Changes in fair value are reflected in “Realized investment gains (losses), net” for commercial mortgage loans.
Changes in fair value due to instrument-specific credit risk are estimated based on changes in credit spreads and quality ratings for the period reported.
None of the loans where the fair value option has been selected are more than 90 days past due or in non-accrual status.
Interest income on commercial mortgage loans is included in net investment income.
For the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, the Company recorded $37 million and $41 million of interest income, respectively, on fair value option loans.
Interest income on these loans is recorded based on the effective interest rates as determined at the closing of the loan.
The fair values and aggregate contractual principal amounts of commercial loans, for which the fair value option has been elected, were $479 million and $556 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2009, and $573 million and $606 million, respectively as December 31, 2008.
The fair values and aggregate contractual principal amounts of long-term debt, for which the fair value option has been elected, were $429 million as of December 31, 2009.
Interest expense recorded on this debt is included in general and administrative expenses.
The Company recorded $10 million of interest expense for the year ended December 31, 2009 for long-term debt where the fair value option has been elected.
Industrial Properties Our dry warehouse/industrial properties consist of seven buildings in New Jersey containing approximately 1.5 million square feet.
The properties are encumbered by two cross-collateralized mortgage loans aggregating $47,179,000 as of December 31, 2006.
Average lease terms range from three to five years.
The following table sets forth the occupancy rate and average annual rent per square foot at the end of each of the past five years.

Tables referenced above, in order (Table 0 first):
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="7"> December 31, 2009  Debt Service Coverage Ratio</td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Greater than  2.0x</td><td> 1.8x to 2.0x</td><td> 1.5x to 1.8x</td><td> 1.2x to 1.5x</td><td> 1.0x to 1.2x</td><td> Less  than 1.0x</td><td> Total Commercial Mortgage Loans</td></tr><tr><td> Loan-to-Value Ratio</td><td colspan="7"> (in millions)</td></tr><tr><td>0%—50%</td><td>$2,813</td><td>$483</td><td>$727</td><td>$541</td><td>$171</td><td>$101</td><td>$4,836</td></tr><tr><td>50%—60%</td><td>1,267</td><td>370</td><td>936</td><td>394</td><td>145</td><td>58</td><td>3,170</td></tr><tr><td>60%—70%</td><td>622</td><td>190</td><td>787</td><td>1,356</td><td>94</td><td>28</td><td>3,077</td></tr><tr><td>70%—80%</td><td>353</td><td>606</td><td>1,185</td><td>1,693</td><td>377</td><td>142</td><td>4,356</td></tr><tr><td>80%—90%</td><td>93</td><td>70</td><td>373</td><td>848</td><td>283</td><td>246</td><td>1,913</td></tr><tr><td>90%—100%</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>123</td><td>188</td><td>255</td><td>197</td><td>763</td></tr><tr><td>Greater than 100%</td><td>20</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>243</td><td>345</td><td>599</td><td>1,207</td></tr><tr><td>Total commercial mortgage loans</td><td>$5,168</td><td>$1,719</td><td>$4,131</td><td>$5,263</td><td>$1,670</td><td>$1,371</td><td>$19,322</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="7"> December 31, 2009  Debt Service Coverage Ratio</td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Greater than  2.0x</td><td> 1.8x  to 2.0x</td><td> 1.5x to 1.8x</td><td> 1.2x to 1.5x</td><td> 1.0x  to 1.2x</td><td> Less  than 1.0x</td><td> Total Commercial Mortgage Loans</td></tr><tr><td> Loan-to-Value Ratio</td><td colspan="7"> (in millions)</td></tr><tr><td>0%—50%</td><td>$1,959</td><td>$435</td><td>$522</td><td>$350</td><td>$64</td><td>$59</td><td>$3,389</td></tr><tr><td>50%—60%</td><td>389</td><td>198</td><td>366</td><td>188</td><td>71</td><td>66</td><td>1,278</td></tr><tr><td>60%—70%</td><td>83</td><td>44</td><td>254</td><td>549</td><td>6</td><td>44</td><td>980</td></tr><tr><td>70%—80%</td><td>75</td><td>86</td><td>470</td><td>708</td><td>100</td><td>15</td><td>1,454</td></tr><tr><td>80%—90%</td><td>112</td><td>45</td><td>199</td><td>156</td><td>94</td><td>83</td><td>689</td></tr><tr><td>90%—100%</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>80</td><td>161</td><td>61</td><td>302</td></tr><tr><td>Greater than 100%</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>123</td><td>106</td><td>165</td><td>394</td></tr><tr><td>Total commercial mortgage loans</td><td>$2,618</td><td>$808</td><td>$1,811</td><td>$2,154</td><td>$602</td><td>$493</td><td>$8,486</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">Years Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">(in millions)</td></tr><tr><td>Assets:</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Commercial mortgage loans:</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Changes in instrument-specific credit risk</td><td>$-69</td><td>$-68</td></tr><tr><td>Other changes in fair value</td><td>—</td><td>29</td></tr><tr><td>Liabilities:</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Long-term debt:</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Changes in fair value</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td></tr></table>

Question: As As the chart 1 shows,what's the value of all Loan-to-Value Ratio for Debt Service Coverage Ratio 1.2x to 1.5x at December 31, 2009 greater than 500 million? (in million)
Answer: 1257
Reasoning program: add(549,708)