## Table 0 ##
22.
Revision of Financial Statements During preparation of the Xcel Energy’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, it was determined that the investment in WYCO should have been reported as cash used in investing activities versus cash provided of $29.7 million as previously reported in the consolidated statement of cash flows for the year ended Dec.  31, 2007.
In addition, the change in other noncurrent assets should have reflected cash provided of $3.3 million versus an outflow of $56.1 million.
Net cash provided by operating activities was previously reported as $1,572 million and revised to $1,632 million.
Net cash used in financing activities was previously reported as $2,022 million and revised to $2,082 million.
Xcel Energy determined that this revision was not material to its previously issued financial statements.
As such, in accordance with the provisions of SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No.108, Considering the Effects of Prior Year Misstatements when Quantifying Misstatements in Current Year Financial Statements, Xcel Energy reflected the revision in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Item 9 — Changes in and Disagreements With Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure During 2007 and 2008, and through the date of this report, there were no disagreements with the independent public accountants on accounting principles or practices, financial statement disclosures, or auditing scope or procedures.
Item 9A — Controls and Procedures Disclosure Controls and Procedures Xcel Energy maintains a set of disclosure controls and procedures designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in reports that it files or submits under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in SEC rules and forms.
In addition, the disclosure controls and procedures ensure that information required to be disclosed is accumulated and communicated to management, including the chief executive officer (CEO) and chief financial officer (CFO), allowing timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
As of Dec.  31, 2008, based on an evaluation carried out under the supervision and with the participation of Xcel Energy’s management, including the CEO and the CFO, of the effectiveness of its disclosure controls and the procedures, the CEO and CFO have concluded that Xcel Energy’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective.
Internal Controls Over Financial Reporting No change in Xcel Energy’s internal control over financial reporting has occurred during the most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, Xcel Energy’s internal control over financial reporting.
Xcel Energy maintains internal control over financial reporting to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of the financial reporting.
Xcel Energy has evaluated and documented its controls in process activities, in general computer activities, and on an entity-wide level.
During the year and in preparation for issuing its report for the year ended Dec.  31, 2008 on internal controls under section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Xcel Energy conducted testing and monitoring of its internal control over financial reporting.
Based on the control evaluation, testing and remediation performed, Xcel Energy did not identify any material control weaknesses, as defined under the standards and rules issued by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) and as approved by the SEC and as indicated in Management Report on Internal Controls herein.
Capacity and Demand Uninterrupted system peak demand and date for the regulated utilities:
## Table 1 ##
(a) Peak demand typically occurs in the summer.
The increase in peak load from 2017 to 2018 is partly due to warmer weather in 2018.
NSP-Minnesota Public Utility Regulation Summary of Regulatory Agencies and Areas of Jurisdiction — Retail rates, services and other aspects of NSP-Minnesota’s operations are regulated by the MPUC, NDPSC and SDPUC.
The MPUC also has regulatory authority over security issuances, certain property transfers, mergers, dispositions of assets and transactions between NSP-Minnesota and its affiliates.
In addition, the MPUC reviews and approves NSP-Minnesota’s IRPs for meeting future energy needs.
In addition, MPUC certifies the need and siting for generating plants greater than 50 MW and transmission lines greater than 100 KV that will be located within the state.
The NDPSC and SDPUC have regulatory authority over generation and transmission facilities, along with the siting and routing of new generation and transmission facilities in North Dakota and South Dakota, respectively.
NSP-Minnesota is subject to the jurisdiction of the FERC for its wholesale electric operations, hydroelectric licensing, accounting practices, wholesale sales for resale, transmission of electricity in interstate commerce, compliance with NERC electric reliability standards, asset transfers and mergers, and natural gas transactions in interstate commerce.
NSP-Minnesota is a transmission owning member of the MISO RTO and operates within the MISO RTO and MISO wholesale markets.
NSP-Minnesota makes wholesale sales in other RTO markets at market-based rates.
NSPMinnesota and NSP-Wisconsin also make wholesale electric sales at marketbased prices to customers outside of their balancing authority as jointly authorized by the FERC.
Fuel, Purchased Energy and Conservation Cost-Recovery Mechanisms — ?
CIP rider — Recovers the costs of conservation and demand-side management programs.  ?
EIR — Recovers the costs of environmental improvement projects.  ?
RDF — Allocates money collected from retail customers to support the research and development of emerging renewable energy projects and technologies.  ?
RES — Recovers the cost of renewable generation in Minnesota.  ?
RER — Recovers the cost of renewable generation located in North Dakota.  ?
SEP — Recovers costs related to various energy policies approved by the Minnesota legislature.  ?
TCR — Recovers costs associated with investments in electric transmission and distribution grid modernization costs.  ?
Infrastructure rider — Recovers costs for investments in generation and incremental property taxes in South Dakota.
NSP-Minnesota’s retail electric rates in Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota include a FCA for monthly billing adjustments to recover changes in prudently incurred costs of fuel related items and purchased energy.
Capacity costs are recovered through base rates and are not recovered through the FCA.
Costs associated with MISO are generally recovered through either the FCA or base rates.
In 2017, the MPUC voted to change the FCA process in Minnesota.
Under the new process, each month utilities would collect amounts equal to the baseline cost of energy set at the start of the plan year (base would be reset annually).
Monthly variations to the baseline costs would be tracked and netted over a 12-month period.
Utilities would issue refunds above the baseline costs, and could seek recovery of any overage.
Recently, the MPUC delayed implementation until January 2020.
Minnesota state law requires NSP-Minnesota to invest 2% of its state electric revenues and 0.5% of its state gas revenues in CIP.
These costs are recovered through an annual cost-recovery mechanism for electric conservation and energy management program expenditures.
Energy Sources and Transmission Service Provider NSP-Minnesota expects to use power plants, power purchases, CIP/DSM options, new generation facilities and expansion of power plants to meet its system capacity requirements.
Purchased Power — NSP-Minnesota has contracts to purchase power from other utilities and IPPs.
Long-term purchased power contracts for dispatchable resources typically require a capacity charge and an energy charge.
NSPMinnesota makes short-term purchases to meet system requirements, replace company owned generation, meet operating reserve obligations or obtain energy at a lower cost.
Purchased Transmission Services — NSP-Minnesota and NSP-Wisconsin have contracts with MISO and other regional transmission service providers to deliver power and energy to their customers.
Wind Development — In 2017, the MPUC approved NSP-Minnesota’s proposal to add 1,550 MW of new wind generation including ownership of 1,150 MW of wind generation.
In April 2018, the MPUC approved NSP-Minnesota’s petition to build and own the Dakota Range, a 300 MW wind project in South Dakota.
NSP-Minnesota’s capital investment for the Dakota Range is expected to be approximately $350 million and placed in service in 2021.
In December 2018, the NDPSC approved a settlement agreement for these wind development projects.
PPA Terminations and Amendments — In June 2018, NSP-Minnesota terminated the Benson and Laurentian PPAs, and purchased the Benson biomass facility.
As a result, a $103 million regulatory asset was recognized for the costs of the Benson transaction.
For Laurentian, a regulatory asset of $109 million was recognized for annual termination payments/obligations.
Regulatory approvals provide for recovery of the Benson regulatory asset over 10 years and Laurentian termination payments as they occur (over six years).
Termination of the PPAs is expected to save customers over $600 million throughout the next 10 years.
ZIMMER HOLDINGS, INC.  AND SUBSIDIARIES 2004 FORM 10-K Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued) The components of accumulated other comprehensive income are as follows (in millions):
## Table 2 ##
Accounting Pronouncements – In November 2004, the No.123(R) requires all share-based payments to employees, FASB issued FASB Staff Position (‘‘FSP’’) 109-1, ‘‘Application including stock options, to be expensed based on their fair of FASB Statement No.109, Accounting for Income Taxes, to values.
The Company has disclosed the effect on net earnings the Tax Deduction on Qualified Production Activities and earnings per share if the Company had applied the fair Provided by the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004’’ and value recognition provisions of SFAS 123.
SFAS 123(R) FSP 109-2, ‘‘Accounting and Disclosure Guidance for the contains three methodologies for adoption: 1) adopt Foreign Earnings Repatriation Provision within the American SFAS 123(R) on the effective date for interim periods Jobs Creation Act of 2004’’.
FSP 109-1 states that a thereafter, 2) adopt SFAS 123(R) on the effective date for company’s deduction under the American Jobs Creation Act interim periods thereafter and restate prior interim periods of 2004 (the ‘‘Act’’) should be accounted for as a special included in the fiscal year of adoption under the provisions of deduction in accordance with SFAS No.109 and not as a tax SFAS 123, or 3) adopt SFAS 123(R) on the effective date for rate reduction.
FSP 109-2 provides accounting and disclosure interim periods thereafter and restate all prior interim guidance for repatriation provisions included under the Act.
periods under the provisions of SFAS 123.
The Company has FSP 109-1 and FSP 109-2 were both effective upon issuance.
not determined an adoption methodology.
The Company is in The adoption of these FSP’s did not have a material impact the process of assessing the impact that SFAS 123(R) will on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or have on its financial position, results of operations and cash cash flows in 2004.  flows.
SFAS 123(R) is effective for the Company on July 1, In November 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No.151, 2005.
‘‘Inventory Costs’’ to clarify the accounting for abnormal amounts of idle facility expense.
SFAS No.151 requires that 3.
ACQUISITIONS fixed overhead production costs be applied to inventory at Centerpulse AG and InCentive Capital AG ‘‘normal capacity’’ and any excess fixed overhead production costs be charged to expense in the period in which they were On October 2, 2003 (the ‘‘Closing Date’’), the Company incurred.
SFAS No.151 is effective for fiscal years beginning closed its exchange offer for Centerpulse, a global after June 15, 2005.
The company does not expect SFAS orthopaedic medical device company headquartered in No.151 to have a material impact on its financial position, Switzerland that services the reconstructive joint, spine and results of operations, or cash flows.
dental implant markets.
The Company also closed its In December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No.153, exchange offer for InCentive, a company that, at the Closing ‘‘Exchanges of Nonmonetary Assets’’, which is effective for Date, owned only cash and beneficially owned 18.3 percent of fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2004.
The Company does the issued Centerpulse shares.
The primary reason for not routinely engage in exchanges of nonmonetary assets; as making the Centerpulse and InCentive exchange offers (the such, SFAS No.153 is not expected to have a material impact ‘‘Exchange Offers’’) was to create a global leader in the on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or design, development, manufacture and marketing of cash flows.
orthopaedic reconstructive implants, including joint and In May 2004, the FASB issued FSP 106-2 ‘‘Accounting dental, spine implants, and trauma products.
The strategic and Disclosure Requirements Related to the Medicare compatibility of the products and technologies of the Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of Company and Centerpulse is expected to provide significant 2003’’, which is effective for the first interim or annual period earnings power and a strong platform from which it can beginning after June 15, 2004.
The Company does not expect actively pursue growth opportunities in the industry.
For the to be eligible for the federal subsidy available pursuant to the Company, Centerpulse provides a unique platform for growth Medicare Prescription Drug Improvement and Modernization and diversification in Europe as well as in the spine and Act of 2003; therefore, this staff position did not have a dental areas of the medical device industry.
As a result of the material impact on the Company’s results of operations, Exchange Offers, the Company beneficially owned financial position or cash flow.98.7 percent of the issued Centerpulse shares (including the In December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No.123(R), Centerpulse shares owned by InCentive) and 99.9 percent of ‘‘Share-Based Payment’’, which is a revision to SFAS No.123, the issued InCentive shares on the Closing Date.
‘‘Accounting for Stock Based Compensation’’.
SFAS

Tables referenced above, in order (Table 0 first):
<table><tr><td> </td><td colspan="4">Quarter Ended</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> March 31, 2007</td><td> June 30, 2007</td><td> Sept. 30, 2007</td><td>Dec. 31, 2007</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td colspan="4">(Thousands of Dollars, except per share amounts)</td></tr><tr><td>Operating revenues</td><td>$2,763,662</td><td>$2,267,292</td><td>$2,399,997</td><td>$2,603,219</td></tr><tr><td>Operating income</td><td>278,128</td><td>289,157</td><td>494,845</td><td>288,941</td></tr><tr><td>Income from continuing operations</td><td>118,514</td><td>67,695</td><td>254,720</td><td>134,969</td></tr><tr><td>Discontinued operations — income (loss)</td><td>1,197</td><td>1,082</td><td>97</td><td>-927</td></tr><tr><td>Net income</td><td>119,711</td><td>68,777</td><td>254,817</td><td>134,042</td></tr><tr><td>Earnings available to common shareholders</td><td>118,651</td><td>67,717</td><td>253,757</td><td>132,982</td></tr><tr><td>Earnings per share total — basic</td><td>$0.29</td><td>$0.16</td><td>$0.60</td><td>$0.31</td></tr><tr><td>Earnings per share total — diluted</td><td>0.28</td><td>0.16</td><td>0.59</td><td>0.31</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="4">System Peak Demand (in MW)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">2018</td><td colspan="2">2017</td></tr><tr><td>NSP System<sup>(a)</sup></td><td>8,927</td><td>June 29</td><td>8,546</td><td>July 17</td></tr><tr><td>PSCo<sup>(a)</sup></td><td>6,718</td><td>July 10</td><td>6,671</td><td>July 19</td></tr><tr><td>SPS<sup>(a)</sup></td><td>4,648</td><td>July 19</td><td>4,374</td><td>July 26</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td>Foreign Currency Translation</td><td>Foreign Currency Hedges</td><td>Minimum Pension Liability</td><td>Unrealized Gains on Securities</td><td>Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income</td></tr><tr><td>Beginning balance at January 1, 2004</td><td>$179.7</td><td>$-40.4</td><td>$-0.6</td><td>$–</td><td>$138.7</td></tr><tr><td>Other comprehensive income (loss)</td><td>145.5</td><td>-33.0</td><td>-0.3</td><td>2.4</td><td>114.6</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at December 31, 2004</td><td>$325.2</td><td>$-73.4</td><td>$-0.9</td><td>$2.4</td><td>$253.3</td></tr></table>

Question: What was the average value of the Income from continuing operations in the years where Income from continuing operations is positive? (in thousand)
Answer: 191966
Reasoning program: add(118514,67695), add(#0,254720), add(#1,134969), divide(#2,const_3)