Liquidity and Capital Resources The following table presents selected financial information and statistics for each of the last three fiscal years (dollars in millions):
## Table 0 ##
As of September 25, 2004, the Company had $5.464 billion in cash, cash equivalents, and short-term investments, an increase of $898 million over the same balances at the end of fiscal 2003.
The principal components of this increase were cash generated by operating activities of $934 million and proceeds of $427 million from the issuance of common stock under stock plans, partially offset by cash used to repay the Company’s outstanding debt of $300 million and purchases of property, plant, and equipment of $176 million.
The Company’s short-term investment portfolio is primarily invested in high credit quality, liquid investments.
Approximately $3.2 billion of this cash, cash equivalents, and short-term investments are held by the Company’s foreign subsidiaries and would be subject to U. S.  income taxation on repatriation to the U. S.  The Company is currently assessing the impact of the one-time favorable foreign dividend provisions recently enacted as part of the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004, and may decide to repatriate earnings from some of its foreign subsidiaries.
The Company believes its existing balances of cash, cash equivalents, and short-term investments will be sufficient to satisfy its working capital needs, capital expenditures, stock repurchase activity, outstanding commitments, and other liquidity requirements associated with its existing operations over the next 12 months.
Debt In February 2004, the Company retired $300 million of debt outstanding in the form of 6.5% unsecured notes.
The notes were originally issued in 1994 and were sold at 99.9925% of par for an effective yield to maturity of 6.51%.
The Company currently has no long-term debt obligations.
Capital Expenditures The Company’s total capital expenditures were $176 million during fiscal 2004, $104 million of which were for retail store facilities and equipment related to the Company’s Retail segment and $72 million of which were primarily for corporate infrastructure, including information systems enhancements and operating facilities enhancements and expansions.
The Company currently anticipates it will utilize approximately $240 million for capital expenditures during 2005, approximately $125 million of which is expected to be utilized for further expansion of the Company’s Retail segment and the remainder utilized to support normal replacement of existing capital assets and enhancements to general information technology infrastructure.
approved in 2006 has been used for the regulatory presentation and all the updated parameters were used for the 2005 ARO layer for SFAS No.143 recognition.16.
Regulatory Assets and Liabilities Xcel Energy’s regulated businesses prepare their Consolidated Financial Statements in accordance with the provisions of SFAS No.71, as discussed in Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Under SFAS No.71, regulatory assets and liabilities can be created for amounts that regulators may allow to be collected, or may require to be paid back to customers in future electric and natural gas rates.
Any portion of Xcel Energy’s business that is not regulated cannot use SFAS No.71 accounting.
If changes in the utility industry or the business of Xcel Energy no longer allow for the application of SFAS No.71 under GAAP, Xcel Energy would be required to recognize the write-off of regulatory assets and liabilities in its statement of income.
The components of unamortized regulatory assets and liabilities of continuing operations shown on the balance sheet at Dec.  31 are:
## Table 1 ##
(a) Earns a return on investment in the ratemaking process.
These amounts are amortized consistent with recovery in rates.
(b) These costs do not relate to NSP-Minnesota’s nuclear plants.
They relate to the DOE assessments, as discussed previously in Note 15.
(c) Excludes current portion expected to be returned to customers within 12 months of $17.7 million and $16.3 million for 2006 and 2005, respectively.
(d) Includes the fair value of certain long-term contracts used to meet native energy requirements.
(e) Includes amounts recorded for future recovery of asset retirement obligations, less amounts recovered through nuclear decommissioning accruals and gains from decommissioning investments.
## Table 2 ##
1 — Prices actively quoted or based on actively quoted prices.2 — Prices based on models and other valuation methods.
These represent the fair value of positions calculated using internal models when directly and indirectly quoted external prices or prices derived from external sources are not available.
Internal models incorporate the use of options pricing and estimates of the present value of cash flows based upon underlying contractual terms.
The models reflect management’s estimates, taking into account observable market prices, estimated market prices in the absence of quoted market prices, the risk-free market discount rate, volatility factors, estimated correlations of commodity prices and contractual volumes.
Market price uncertainty and other risks also are factored into the model.
* — SPS conducts an inconsequential amount of commodity trading.
Margins from commodity trading activity are partially redistributed to SPS, NSP-Minnesota, and PSCo, pursuant to the JOA approved by the FERC.
As a result of the JOA, margins received pursuant to the JOA are reflected as part of the fair values by source for the commodity trading net asset or liability balances.
Normal purchases and sales transactions, as defined by SFAS No.133 and certain other long-term power purchase contracts are not included in the fair values by source tables as they are not recorded at fair value as part of commodity trading operations and are not qualifying hedges.
At Dec.  31, 2006, a 10-percent increase in market prices over the next 12 months for commodity trading contracts would increase pretax income from continuing operations by approximately $0.9 million, whereas a 10-percent decrease would decrease pretax income from continuing operations by approximately $1.1 million.
Xcel Energy’s short-term wholesale and commodity trading operations measure the outstanding risk exposure to price changes on transactions, contracts and obligations that have been entered into, but not closed, using an industry standard methodology known as VaR.
VaR expresses the potential change in fair value on the outstanding transactions, contracts and obligations over a particular period of time, with a given confidence interval under normal market conditions.
Xcel Energy utilizes the variance/covariance approach in calculating VaR.
The VaR model employs a 95-percent confidence interval level based on historical price movement, lognormal price distribution assumption, delta half-gamma approach for non-linear instruments and a three-day holding period for both electricity and natural gas.
VaR is calculated on a consolidated basis.
The VaRs for the commodity trading operations were:
## Table 3 ##
(a) Comprises transactions for NSP-Minnesota, PSCo and SPS.
Interest Rate Risk — Xcel Energy and its subsidiaries are subject to the risk of fluctuating interest rates in the normal course of business.
Xcel Energy’s policy allows interest rate risk to be managed through the use of fixed rate debt, floating rate debt and interest rate derivatives such as swaps, caps, collars and put or call options.
Xcel Energy engages in hedges of cash flow and fair value exposure.
The fair value of interest rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges is initially recorded in Other Comprehensive Income.
Reclassification of unrealized gains or losses on cash flow hedges of variable rate debt instruments from Other Comprehensive Income into earnings occurs as interest payments are accrued on the debt instrument, and generally offsets the change in the interest accrued on the underlying variable rate debt.
Hedges of fair value exposure are entered into to hedge the fair value of debt instruments.
Changes in the derivative fair values that are designated as fair value hedges are recognized in earnings as offsets to the changes in fair values of debt instruments.
To test the effectiveness of such swaps, a hypothetical swap is used to mirror all the critical terms of the underlying debt and regression analysis is utilized to assess the effectiveness of the actual swap at inception and on an ongoing basis.
The fair value of interest rate swaps is determined through
Dividend and Other Capital-Related Restrictions — Xcel Energy depends on its subsidiaries to pay dividends.
All of Xcel Energy Inc. ’s utility subsidiaries’ dividends are subject to the FERC’s jurisdiction, which prohibits the payment of dividends out of capital accounts; payment of dividends is allowed out of retained earnings only.
Due to certain restrictive covenants, Xcel Energy Inc.  is required to be current on particular interest payments before dividends can be paid.
The most restrictive dividend limitations for NSP-Minnesota, NSP-Wisconsin and SPS are imposed by their respective state regulatory commission.
PSCo’s dividends are subject to the FERC’s jurisdiction under the Federal Power Act, which prohibits the payment of dividends out of capital accounts; payment of dividends is allowed out of retained earnings only.
Only NSP-Minnesota has a first mortgage indenture which places certain restrictions on the amount of cash dividends it can pay to Xcel Energy Inc. , the holder of its common stock.
Even with this restriction, NSP-Minnesota could have paid more than $1.7 billion in additional cash dividends to Xcel Energy Inc.  at both Dec.  31, 2016 and 2015.
NSP-Minnesota’s state regulatory commissions indirectly limit the amount of dividends NSP-Minnesota can pay by requiring an equity-to-total capitalization ratio between 46.9 percent and 57.3 percent.
NSP-Minnesota’s equity-to-total capitalization ratio was 52.1 percent at Dec.  31, 2016 and $1.0 billion in retained earnings was not restricted.
Total capitalization for NSP-Minnesota was $10.3 billion at Dec.  31, 2016, which did not exceed the limit of $10.75 billion.
NSP-Wisconsin cannot pay annual dividends in excess of approximately $53.1 million if its calendar year average equity-to-total capitalization ratio is or falls below the state commission authorized level of 52.5 percent, as calculated consistent with PSCW requirements.
NSP-Wisconsin’s calendar year average equity-to-total capitalization ratio calculated on this basis was 53.6 percent at Dec.  31, 2016 and $33.6 million in retained earnings was not restricted.
SPS’ state regulatory commissions indirectly limit the amount of dividends that SPS can pay Xcel Energy Inc.  by requiring an equityto-total capitalization ratio (excluding short-term debt) between 45.0 percent and 55.0 percent.
In addition, SPS may not pay a dividend that would cause it to lose its investment grade bond rating.
SPS’ equity-to-total capitalization ratio (excluding short-term debt) was 54.1 percent at Dec.  31, 2016 and $487 million in retained earnings was not restricted.
The issuance of securities by Xcel Energy Inc.  generally is not subject to regulatory approval.
However, utility financings and certain intra-system financings are subject to the jurisdiction of the applicable state regulatory commissions and/or the FERC.
As of Dec.  31, 2016: ?
PSCo has authorization to issue up to an additional $2.2 billion of long-term debt and up to $800 million of short-term debt.  ?
SPS has authorization to issue up to $500 million of short-term debt and SPS will file for additional long-term debt authorization.  ?
NSP-Wisconsin has authorization to issue up to $150 million of short-term debt and NSPW will file for additional long-term debt authorization.  ?
NSP-Minnesota has authorization to issue long-term securities provided the equity-to-total capitalization ratio remains between 46.9 percent and 57.3 percent and to issue short-term debt provided it does not exceed 15 percent of total capitalization.
Total capitalization for NSP-Minnesota cannot exceed $10.75 billion.
Xcel Energy believes these authorizations are adequate and seeks additional authorization as necessary.5.
Joint Ownership of Generation, Transmission and Gas Facilities Following are the investments by Xcel Energy Inc. ’s utility subsidiaries in jointly owned generation, transmission and gas facilities and the related ownership percentages as of Dec.  31, 2016:

Tables referenced above, in order (Table 0 first):
<table><tr><td></td><td>2004</td><td>2003</td><td>2002</td></tr><tr><td>Cash, cash equivalents, and short-term investments</td><td>$5,464</td><td>$4,566</td><td>$4,337</td></tr><tr><td>Accounts receivable, net</td><td>$774</td><td>$766</td><td>$565</td></tr><tr><td>Inventory</td><td>$101</td><td>$56</td><td>$45</td></tr><tr><td>Working capital</td><td>$4,375</td><td>$3,530</td><td>$3,730</td></tr><tr><td>Days sales in accounts receivable (DSO) (a)</td><td>30</td><td>41</td><td>36</td></tr><tr><td>Days of supply in inventory (b)</td><td>5</td><td>4</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>Days payables outstanding (DPO) (c)</td><td>76</td><td>82</td><td>77</td></tr><tr><td>Annual operating cash flow</td><td>$934</td><td>$289</td><td>$89</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td> </td><td> See Note(s)</td><td> Remaining Amortization Period</td><td> 2006</td><td> 2005</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td colspan="4"> (Thousands of Dollars)</td></tr><tr><td> Regulatory Assets</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Pension and employee benefit obligations</td><td>9</td><td>Various</td><td>$475,815</td><td>$27,234</td></tr><tr><td>AFDC recorded in plant(a)</td><td></td><td>Plant lives</td><td>179,023</td><td>170,785</td></tr><tr><td>Conservation programs(a)</td><td></td><td>Various</td><td>124,123</td><td>111,429</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>Term of related</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Contract valuation adjustments(d)</td><td>11</td><td>contract</td><td>109,221</td><td>111,639</td></tr><tr><td>Losses on reacquired debt</td><td>1</td><td>Term of related debt</td><td>74,420</td><td>84,290</td></tr><tr><td>Net asset retirement obligations(e)</td><td>1,14</td><td>Plant lives</td><td>54,550</td><td>171,170</td></tr><tr><td>Renewable resource costs</td><td></td><td>One to two years</td><td>49,902</td><td>50,453</td></tr><tr><td>Environmental costs</td><td>14,15</td><td>Generally four to six years</td><td>35,715</td><td>33,957</td></tr><tr><td>Unrecovered natural gas costs(c)</td><td>1</td><td>One to two years</td><td>17,943</td><td>12,998</td></tr><tr><td>Private fuel storage</td><td></td><td>Five years</td><td>14,473</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>State commission accounting adjustments(a)</td><td></td><td>Plant lives</td><td>13,950</td><td>14,460</td></tr><tr><td>Unrecovered electric production and MISO Day 2 costs</td><td>1</td><td>To be determined in future rate proceedings</td><td>11,014</td><td>6,634</td></tr><tr><td>Nuclear decommissioning costs(b)</td><td></td><td>To be determined in future rate proceedings</td><td>9,325</td><td>8,317</td></tr><tr><td>Rate case costs</td><td>1</td><td>Various</td><td>8,689</td><td>4,549</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td></td><td>Various</td><td>10,982</td><td>12,092</td></tr><tr><td>Total regulatory assets</td><td></td><td></td><td>$1,189,145</td><td>$820,007</td></tr><tr><td>Regulatory Liabilities</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Plant removal costs</td><td>1,14</td><td></td><td>$920,583</td><td>$895,653</td></tr><tr><td>Pension and employee benefit obligations</td><td>9</td><td></td><td>196,803</td><td>397,261</td></tr><tr><td>Investment tax credit deferrals</td><td></td><td></td><td>78,205</td><td>84,437</td></tr><tr><td>Deferred income tax adjustments</td><td>1</td><td></td><td>67,002</td><td>75,171</td></tr><tr><td>Contract valuation adjustments(d)</td><td>11</td><td></td><td>56,745</td><td>99,734</td></tr><tr><td>Fuel costs, refunds and other</td><td></td><td></td><td>30,032</td><td>9,137</td></tr><tr><td>Electric fuel recovery refund</td><td></td><td></td><td>10,054</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Interest on income tax refunds</td><td></td><td></td><td>5,233</td><td>6,031</td></tr><tr><td>Total regulatory liabilities</td><td></td><td></td><td>$1,364,657</td><td>$1,567,424</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td> </td><td colspan="6"> Options</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> Source of Fair Value</td><td> Maturity Less Than 1 Year</td><td> Maturity 1 to 3 Years</td><td> Maturity 4 to 5 Years</td><td> Maturity Greater Than 5 Years</td><td> Total Options Fair Value</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td colspan="6"> (Thousands of Dollars)</td></tr><tr><td>NSP-Minnesota</td><td>2</td><td>$514</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td><td>$514</td></tr><tr><td>PSCo</td><td>2</td><td>3,241</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>3,241</td></tr><tr><td>NSP-Wisconsin</td><td>2</td><td>20</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>20</td></tr><tr><td>Total Options Fair Value</td><td></td><td>$3,775</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td><td>$3,775</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td> </td><td> </td><td colspan="3"> During 2006</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> Year ended Dec. 31, 2006</td><td> Average</td><td> High</td><td> Low</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td colspan="4"> (Millions of Dollars)</td></tr><tr><td>Commodity trading(a)</td><td>$0.49</td><td>$1.32</td><td>$2.60</td><td>$0.39</td></tr></table>

Question: In which year is Contract valuation adjustments(d) greater than 1?
Answer: 2006 2005