notes payable.
Considerable judgment is necessary to estimate the fair value of financial instruments.
The estimates of fair value presented herein are not necessarily indicative of the amounts that could be realized upon disposition of the financial instruments.
A summary of the carrying amount and fair value of our mortgages payable, notes payable and senior notes and debentures is as follows:
## Table 0 ##
NOTE 8.
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES We are currently a party to various legal proceedings.
Other than as described below, we do not believe that the ultimate outcome of these matters, either individually or in the aggregate, could have a material adverse effect on our financial position or overall trends in results of operations; however, litigation is subject to inherent uncertainties.
Also under our leases, tenants are typically obligated to indemnify us from and against all liabilities, costs and expenses imposed upon or asserted against us (1) as owner of the properties due to certain matters relating to the operation of the properties by the tenant, and (2) where appropriate, due to certain matters relating to the ownership of the properties prior to their acquisition by us.
We are involved in a litigation matter relating to a shopping center in New Jersey where a former tenant has alleged that we and our management agent acted improperly by failing to disclose a condemnation action at the property that was pending when the lease was signed.
A trial as to liability only has been concluded and post-trial briefs have been filed, but no decision has been rendered.
One of the plaintiffs in the matter has filed for bankruptcy protection and as a result, the judge in our case has stayed further proceedings in the case.
If we are found liable once the stay has been lifted, a trial will be held to determine the amount of damages.
Based on the information available to us, we believe there is a reasonable possibility that we will be found liable.
If a verdict is rendered against us, we may seek indemnification from the third party management company that negotiated the lease on our behalf.
We cannot assess with any certainty at this time the potential damages for which we would be liable if a verdict is rendered against us or the potential amounts we might recover against the third party management company; however, if a verdict is rendered against us, there may be a material adverse impact on our net income in the period in which it becomes both probable that we will have to pay the damages and such damages can be reasonably estimated.
In any event, management does not believe it will have a material impact on our financial position.
We also have one litigation matter filed against us in May 2003 which alleges that a one page document entitled “Final Proposal,” which included language that it was subject to approval of formal documentation, constituted a ground lease of a parcel of property located adjacent to our Santana Row property and gave the plaintiff the option to require that we acquire the property at a price determined in accordance with a formula included in the “Final Proposal.
” A trial as to liability only was held in June 2006 and a jury rendered a verdict against us.
A trial on the issue of damages has been set for April 2008.
The complaint did not specify the amount of damages claimed.
We have now received reports from our experts and the plaintiff’s experts which show potential damages ranging from $600,000 to $24 million.
We cannot make a reasonable estimate of potential damages until discovery is completed on the damages issue and the court rules on various legal issues impacting the calculation of damages.
We intend to appeal the jury verdict; however, no appeal of the judgment can be taken until the trial on damages has been completed.
If we are not successful in overturning the jury verdict, we will be liable for damages.
Depending on the amount of damages awarded, it is possible there could be a material adverse impact on our net income in the period in which it becomes both probable that we will have to pay the damages and such damages can be reasonably estimated.
In any event, management does not believe it will have a material impact on our financial position.
MORGAN STANLEY NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued) Other Regulated Subsidiaries.
Certain other U. S.  and non-U.
S.  subsidiaries are subject to various securities, commodities and banking regulations, and capital adequacy requirements promulgated by the regulatory and exchange authorities of the countries in which they operate.
These subsidiaries have consistently operated with capital in excess of their local capital adequacy requirements.
Morgan Stanley Derivative Products Inc.  (“MSDP”), a derivative products subsidiary rated A3 by Moody’s and AA- by S&P, maintains certain operating restrictions that have been reviewed by Moody’s and S&P.
MSDP is operated such that creditors of the Company should not expect to have any claims on the assets of MSDP, unless and until the obligations to its own creditors are satisfied in full.
Creditors of MSDP should not expect to have any claims on the assets of the Company or any of its affiliates, other than the respective assets of MSDP.
The regulatory capital requirements referred to above, and certain covenants contained in various agreements governing indebtedness of the Company, may restrict the Company’s ability to withdraw capital from its subsidiaries.
At December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, approximately $31.8 billion and $21.9 billion, respectively, of net assets of consolidated subsidiaries may be restricted as to the payment of cash dividends and advances to the parent company.15.
Total Equity Morgan Stanley Shareholders’ Equity.
Common Stock.
Changes in shares of common stock outstanding for 2014 and 2013 were as follows (share data in millions):
## Table 1 ##
(1) Treasury stock purchases include repurchases of common stock for employee tax withholding.
(2) Other includes net shares issued to and forfeited from Employee stock trusts and issued for RSU conversions.
Treasury Shares.
At December 31, 2014, the Company had approximately $0.3 billion remaining under its current share repurchase program.
The share repurchase program is for capital management purposes and considers, among other things, business segment capital needs as well as equity-based compensation and benefit plan requirements.
Share repurchases under the Company’s existing authorized program will be exercised from time to time at prices the Company deems appropriate subject to various factors, including the Company’s capital position and market conditions.
The share repurchases may be effected through open market purchases or privately negotiated transactions, including through Rule 10b5-1 plans, and may be suspended at any time.
Share repurchases by the Company are subject to regulatory approval (see “Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities” in Part II, Item 5).
In March 2014, the Company received no objection from the Federal Reserve to the Company’s 2014 capital plan, which included a share repurchase of up to $1 billion of the Company’s outstanding common stock beginning in the second quarter of 2014 through the end of the first quarter of 2015 as well as an increase in the Company’s quarterly common stock dividend to $0.10 per share from $0.05 per share, beginning with the dividend declared on April 17, 2014.
The cash dividends declared on the Company’s outstanding preferred stock
PRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL, INC.  Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements 20.
FAIR VALUE OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES (continued)
## Table 2 ##
(1) Other represents the impact of consolidation or deconsolidation of funds and reclasses of certain assets between reporting categories.
(2) Transfers into or out of Level 3 are generally reported as the value as of the beginning of the quarter in which the transfer occurs.
(3) Unrealized gains or losses related to assets still held at the end of the period do not include amortization or accretion of premiums and discounts.
(4) Separate account assets represent segregated funds that are invested for certain customers.
Investment risks associated with market value changes are borne by the customers, except to the extent of minimum guarantees made by the Company with respect to certain accounts.
Separate account liabilities are not included in the above table as they are reported at contract value and not fair value in the Company’s Consolidated Statement of Financial Position.
Transfers—Transfers out of Level 3 for Fixed Maturities Available for Sale — Asset-Backed Securities and Trading Account Assets Supporting Insurance Liabilities — Asset-Backed Securities include $4,974 million and $222 million, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2010 resulting from the Company’s conclusion that the market for asset-backed securities collateralized by sub-prime mortgages has been becoming increasingly active, as evidenced by orderly transactions.
The pricing received from independent pricing services could be validated by the Company, as discussed in detail above.
Other transfers out of Level 3 were typically due to the use of observable inputs in valuation methodologies as well as the utilization of pricing service information for certain assets that the Company was able to validate.
Transfers into Level 3 were primarily the result of unobservable inputs utilized within valuation methodologies and the use of broker quotes (that could not be validated) when previously, information from third party pricing services (that could be validated) was utilized.
Table of Contents NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION respectively.
For these assets, estimates of fair value are determined using the best information available.
At December 31, 2008, and 2007, the pension and health and welfare trusts did not hold any Northrop Grumman common stock.
In 2009, the company expects to contribute the required minimum funding level of approximately $126 million to its pension plans and approximately $178 million to its other postretirement benefit plans and also expects to make additional voluntary pension contributions of approximately $250 million in each of the first and third quarters.
During 2008 and 2007, the company made voluntary pension contributions of $200 million in each year.
It is not expected that any assets will be returned to the company from the benefit plans during 2009.
Benefit Payments The following table reflects estimated future benefit payments, based upon the same assumptions used to measure the benefit obligation, and includes expected future employee service, as of December 31, 2008:
## Table 3 ##
18.
STOCK COMPENSATION PLANS Plan Descriptions At December 31, 2008, Northrop Grumman had stock-based compensation awards outstanding under the following plans: the 2001 Long-Term Incentive Stock Plan (2001 LTISP), the 1993 Long-Term Incentive Stock Plan (1993 LTISP), both applicable to employees, and the 1993 Stock Plan for Non-Employee Directors (1993 SPND) and 1995 Stock Plan for Non-Employee Directors (1995 SPND) as amended.
All of these plans were approved by the company’s shareholders.
The company has historically issued new shares to satisfy award grants.
Employee Plans – The 2001 LTISP and the 1993 LTISP permit grants to key employees of three general types of stock incentive awards: stock options, stock appreciation rights (SARs), and stock awards.
Each stock option grant is made with an exercise price either at the closing price of the stock on the date of grant (market options) or at a premium over the closing price of the stock on the date of grant (premium options).
Outstanding stock options granted prior to 2008 generally vest in 25 percent increments over four years from the grant date under the 2001 LTISP and in years two to five under the 1993 LTISP, and grants outstanding expire ten years after the grant date.
Stock options granted in 2008 vest in 33 percent increments over three years from the grant date, and grants outstanding expire seven years after the grant date.
No SARs have been granted under either of the LTISPs.
Stock awards, in the form of restricted performance stock rights and restricted stock rights, are granted to key employees without payment to the company.
Under the 2001 LTISP, recipients of restricted performance stock rights earn shares of stock, based on financial metrics determined by the Board of Directors in accordance with the plan.
For grants prior to 2007, if the objectives have not been met at the end of the applicable performance period, up to 100 percent of the original grant for the eight highest compensated employees and up to 70 percent of the original grant for all other recipients will be forfeited.
If the financial metrics are met or exceeded during the performance period, all recipients can earn up to 150 percent of the original grant.
Beginning in 2007, all members of the Corporate Policy Council could forfeit up to 100 percent of the original 2007 grant, and all recipients could earn up to
NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION Segment Operating (Loss) Income 2008 – Operating loss at Shipbuilding was $2.3 billion as compared with operating income of $538 million in the same period of 2007.
The decrease is due to a goodwill impairment charge of $2.5 billion (see Goodwill Impairment on page 33), and $366 million in net lower performance results, partially offset by the higher sales volume described above.
The decrease in net performance results is primarily due to a $326 million pre-tax charge on LHD-8 and other programs in the first quarter of 2008, cost growth and schedule delays on several LPD ships resulting primarily from the effects of Hurricane Ike on an LPD subcontractor (see Note 16 to the consolidated financial statements in Part II, Item 8), and the effect of reductions in contract booking rates resulting from management taking a more conservative approach in its risk assessment on programs throughout the Gulf Coast Shipyards.
The LHD-8 program achieved several important risk retirement milestones toward its planned delivery date, and as a result, $63 million of the first quarter 2008 charge was reversed in the second half of 2008.2007 – Operating income at Shipbuilding increased $145 million, or 37 percent, as compared with 2006.
The increase is primarily due to $43 million from the higher sales volume described above, $62 million for recovery of lost profits from a settlement of a portion of the Katrina insurance claim, and a $23 million pre-tax gain resulting from the reorganization of AMSEC, partially offset by $55 million for a contract earnings rate adjustment on LHD-8 associated with a schedule extension resulting from manpower constraints in critical crafts (electrical and pipefitting) following the strike at the Pascagoula shipyard in 2007.
BACKLOG Total backlog at December 31, 2008, was approximately $78 billion.
Total backlog includes both funded backlog (firm orders for which funding is contractually obligated by the customer) and unfunded backlog (firm orders for which funding is not currently contractually obligated by the customer).
Unfunded backlog excludes unexercised contract options and unfunded IDIQ orders.
For multi-year services contracts with non-federal government customers having no stated contract values, backlog includes only the amounts committed by the customer.
The following table presents funded and unfunded backlog by segment at December 31, 2008 and 2007:
## Table 4 ##
Backlog is converted into the following years’ sales as costs are incurred or deliveries are made.
Approximately 65 percent of the $37.4 billion funded backlog at December 31, 2008, is expected to be converted into sales in 2009.
Total U. S.  Government orders, including those made on behalf of foreign governments, comprised 90 percent, 89 percent, and 90 percent of the funded backlog at the end of 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively.
Total foreign customer orders accounted for 7 percent, 6 percent, and 5 percent of the funded backlog at the end of 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively.
Domestic commercial backlog represented 3 percent, 5 percent, and 5 percent of funded backlog at the end of 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively.
Table of Contents NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION Free cash flow is not a measure of financial performance under U. S.  GAAP, and may not be defined and calculated by other companies in the same manner.
This measure should not be considered in isolation or as an alternative to operating results presented in accordance with U. S.  GAAP as indicators of performance.

<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2"> December 31, 2007</td><td colspan="2"> December 31, 2006</td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Carrying Value</td><td> Fair Value</td><td> Carrying Value</td><td> Fair Value</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="4"> (In thousands)</td></tr><tr><td>Mortgages and notes payable</td><td>$584,795</td><td>$603,200</td><td>$420,061</td><td>$449,130</td></tr><tr><td>Senior notes</td><td>$977,556</td><td>$979,562</td><td>$1,127,508</td><td>$1,146,767</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td></tr><tr><td>Shares outstanding at beginning of period</td><td>1,945</td><td>1,974</td></tr><tr><td>Treasury stock purchases-1</td><td>-46</td><td>-27</td></tr><tr><td>Other-2</td><td>52</td><td>-2</td></tr><tr><td>Shares outstanding at end of period</td><td>1,951</td><td>1,945</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">Year Ended December 31, 2010</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Other Assets</td><td>Separate Account Assets -4</td><td>Future Policy Benefits</td><td>Long- term Debt</td><td>Other Liabilities</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">(in millions)</td></tr><tr><td>Fair Value, beginning of period</td><td>$27</td><td>$13,052</td><td>$-55</td><td>$-429</td><td>$-6</td></tr><tr><td>Total gains or (losses) (realized/unrealized):</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Included in earnings:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Realized investment gains (losses), net</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>570</td><td>0</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Asset management fees and other income</td><td>-7</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>Interest credited to policyholders’ account balances</td><td>0</td><td>2,129</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>Included in other comprehensive income (loss)</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>Net investment income</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements</td><td>-11</td><td>851</td><td>-311</td><td>429</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Foreign currency translation</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>Other-1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>Transfers into Level 3-2</td><td>0</td><td>171</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>Transfers out of Level 3-2</td><td>0</td><td>-411</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>Fair Value, end of period</td><td>$9</td><td>$15,792</td><td>$204</td><td>$0</td><td>$-3</td></tr><tr><td>Unrealized gains (losses) for the period relating to those Level 3 assets and liabilities that were still held at the end of theperiod(3):</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Included in earnings:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Realized investment gains (losses), net</td><td>$0</td><td>$0</td><td>$522</td><td>$0</td><td>$1</td></tr><tr><td>Asset management fees and other income</td><td>$-7</td><td>$0</td><td>$0</td><td>$0</td><td>$0</td></tr><tr><td>Interest credited to policyholders’ account balances</td><td>$0</td><td>$1,081</td><td>$0</td><td>$0</td><td>$0</td></tr><tr><td>Included in other comprehensive income (loss)</td><td>$0</td><td>$0</td><td>$0</td><td>$0</td><td>$0</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td><i>$ in millions</i></td><td>Pension Plans</td><td>Medical and Life Plans</td></tr><tr><td>Year Ending December 31</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>2009</td><td>$1,147</td><td>$205</td></tr><tr><td>2010</td><td>1,216</td><td>207</td></tr><tr><td>2011</td><td>1,291</td><td>209</td></tr><tr><td>2012</td><td>1,353</td><td>212</td></tr><tr><td>2013</td><td>1,424</td><td>218</td></tr><tr><td>2014 through 2018</td><td>8,367</td><td>1,198</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3"> 2008</td><td colspan="3">2007</td></tr><tr><td><i>$ in millions</i></td><td> Funded</td><td> Unfunded</td><td> Total   Backlog</td><td>Funded</td><td>Unfunded</td><td>Total  Backlog</td></tr><tr><td> Information & Services</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Mission Systems</td><td>$2,646</td><td>$3,004</td><td>$5,650</td><td>$2,365</td><td>$3,288</td><td>$5,653</td></tr><tr><td>Information Technology</td><td>2,724</td><td>1,899</td><td>4,623</td><td>2,581</td><td>2,268</td><td>4,849</td></tr><tr><td>Technical Services</td><td>1,734</td><td>2,600</td><td>4,334</td><td>1,471</td><td>3,193</td><td>4,664</td></tr><tr><td> Aerospace</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Integrated Systems</td><td>5,759</td><td>5,122</td><td>10,881</td><td>4,204</td><td>4,525</td><td>8,729</td></tr><tr><td>Space Technology</td><td>1,889</td><td>17,761</td><td>19,650</td><td>2,295</td><td>13,963</td><td>16,258</td></tr><tr><td> Electronics</td><td>8,437</td><td>2,124</td><td>10,561</td><td>7,887</td><td>2,047</td><td>9,934</td></tr><tr><td> Shipbuilding</td><td>14,205</td><td>8,148</td><td>22,353</td><td>10,348</td><td>3,230</td><td>13,578</td></tr><tr><td>Total backlog</td><td>$37,394</td><td>$40,658</td><td>$78,052</td><td>$31,151</td><td>$32,514</td><td>$63,665</td></tr></table>

Question: What was the average of theIntegrated Systems in the years where Technical Services is positive? (in million)
Answer: 9805