Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Notes to Financial Statements Entergy Arkansas made its payment in January 2012.
In February 2012, Entergy Arkansas filed for an interim adjustment to its production cost allocation rider requesting that the $156 million payment be collected from customers over the 22-month period from March 2012 through December 2013.
In March 2012 the APSC issued an order stating that the payment can be recovered from retail customers through the production cost allocation rider, subject to refund.
The LPSC and the APSC have requested rehearing of the FERC’s October 2011 order.
In December 2013 the LPSC filed a petition for a writ of mandamus at the United States Court of Appeals for the D. C.  Circuit.
In its petition, the LPSC requested that the D. C.  Circuit issue an order compelling the FERC to issue a final order on pending rehearing requests.
In January 2014 the D. C.  Circuit denied the LPSC’s petition.
The APSC, the LPSC, the PUCT, and other parties intervened in the December 2011 compliance filing proceeding, and the APSC and the LPSC also filed protests.
In February 2014 the FERC issued a rehearing order addressing its October 2011 order.
The FERC denied the LPSC’s request for rehearing on the issues of whether the bandwidth remedy should be made effective earlier than June 1, 2005, and whether refunds should be ordered for the 20-month refund effective period.
The FERC granted the LPSC’s rehearing request on the issue of interest on the bandwidth payments/receipts for the June - December 2005 period, requiring that interest be accrued from June 1, 2006 until the date those bandwidth payments/receipts are made.
Also in February 2014 the FERC issued an order rejecting the December 2011 compliance filing that calculated the bandwidth payments/receipts for the June - December 2005 period.
The FERC order required a new compliance filing that calculates the bandwidth payments/receipts for the June - December 2005 period based on monthly data for the seven individual months including interest pursuant to the February 2014 rehearing order.
Entergy has sought rehearing of the February 2014 orders with respect to the FERC’s determinations regarding interest.
In April 2014 the LPSC filed a petition for review of the FERC’s October 2011 and February 2014 orders with the U. S.  Court of Appeals for the D. C.  Circuit.
The appeal is pending.
In April and May 2014, Entergy filed with the FERC an updated compliance filing that provides the payments and receipts among the Utility operating companies pursuant to the FERC’s February 2014 orders.
The filing shows the following net payments and receipts, including interest, among the Utility operating companies:
## Table 0 ##
These payments were made in May 2014.
The LPSC, City Council, and APSC have filed protests.
Other Operating Charges Other operating charges incurred by operating segment were as follows (in millions):
## Table 1 ##
In 2014, the Company incurred other operating charges of $1,183 million.
These charges primarily consisted of $601 million due to the Company’s productivity and reinvestment program and $208 million due to the integration of our German bottling and distribution operations.
In addition, the Company incurred a charge of $314 million due to a write-down we recorded related to our concentrate sales receivables from our bottling partner in Venezuela and an impairment of a Venezuelan trademark primarily due to higher exchange rates.
The write-down was recorded as a result of our revised assessment of the U. S.  dollar value we expect to realize upon the conversion of the Venezuelan bolivar into U. S.  dollars by our bottling partner to pay our concentrate sales receivables.
The Company also recorded a loss of $36 million as a result of the restructuring and transition of the Company’s Russian juice operations to an existing joint venture with an unconsolidated bottling partner.
Refer to Note 18 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements and see below for additional information on our productivity and reinvestment program as well as the Company’s other productivity, integration and restructuring initiatives.
Refer to Note 1 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on the Venezuelan currency rate change.
Refer to Note 19 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for the impact these charges had on our operating segments.
In 2013, the Company incurred other operating charges of $895 million, which primarily consisted of $494 million associated with the Company’s productivity and reinvestment program; $195 million due to the impairment of certain intangible assets; $188 million due to the Company’s other productivity, integration and restructuring initiatives; and $22 million due to charges associated with certain of the Company’s fixed assets.
Refer to Note 17 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information on the impairment charges.
Refer to Note 18 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements and see below for further information on the Company’s productivity and reinvestment program, as well as the Company’s other productivity, integration and restructuring initiatives.
Refer to Note 19 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for the impact these charges had on our operating segments.
In 2012, the Company incurred other operating charges of $447 million, which primarily consisted of $270 million associated with the Company’s productivity and reinvestment program; $163 million related to the Company’s other restructuring and integration initiatives; $20 million due to changes in the Company’s ready-to-drink tea strategy as a result of our U. S.  license agreement with Nestlé terminating at the end of 2012; and $8 million due to costs associated with the Company detecting carbendazim in orange juice imported from Brazil for distribution in the United States.
These charges were partially offset by reversals of $10 million associated with the refinement of previously established accruals related to the Company’s 2008–2011 productivity initiatives, as well as reversals of $6 million associated with the refinement of previously established accruals related to the Company’s integration of CCE’s former North America business.
Refer to Note 18 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements and see below for additional information on the Company’s productivity, integration and restructuring initiatives.
Refer to Note 19 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for the impact these charges had on our operating segments.
Productivity and Reinvestment Program In February 2012, the Company announced a four-year productivity and reinvestment program.
This program is designed to assist us in strengthening our brands and reinvesting our resources to drive long-term profitable growth.
The first component of this program is a global productivity initiative that will target annualized productivity of $350 million to $400 million.
This initiative will be focused on four primary areas: global supply chain optimization; global marketing and innovation effectiveness; operating expense leverage and operational excellence; and data and information technology systems standardization.
The second component of our productivity and reinvestment program relates to additional integration initiatives in North America as a result of our acquisition of CCE’s former North America business.
The Company has identified incremental synergies, primarily in the area of our North American product supply operations, which will better
Fair Value Hierarchy.
Fixed maturity securities and equity securities available-for-sale measured at estimated fair value on a recurring basis and their corresponding fair value pricing sources and fair value hierarchy are as follows:
## Table 2 ##
December 31, 2010
## Table 3 ##
The composition of fair value pricing sources for and significant changes in Level 3 securities at December 31, 2010 are as follows: .
The majority of the Level 3 fixed maturity and equity securities (84%, as presented above) were concentrated in four sectors: U. S.  and foreign corporate securities, ABS and foreign government securities.  .  Level 3 fixed maturity securities are priced principally through market standard valuation methodologies, independent pricing services and independent non-binding broker quotations using inputs that are not market observable or cannot be derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data.
Level 3 fixed maturity securities consists of less liquid fixed maturity securities with very limited trading activity or where less price transparency exists around the inputs to the valuation methodologies including alternative residential mortgage loan RMBS and less liquid prime RMBS, certain below investment grade private placements and less liquid investment grade corporate securities (included in U. S.  and foreign corporate securities) and less liquid ABS including securities supported by sub-prime mortgage loans (included in ABS).  ?
During the year ended December 31, 2010, Level 3 fixed maturity securities increased by $371 million, or 2%, excluding the impact of the Acquisition, and $5,605 million, or 33%, including the impact of the Acquisition.
The Level 3 fixed maturity securities acquired from ALICO of $5,435 million have been included in purchases, sales, issuances and settlements in the table below.
The increase was driven by net purchases in excess of sales and increases in estimated fair value recognized in other comprehensive income (loss).
Net purchases in excess of sales of fixed maturity securities were concentrated in foreign government and ABS.
The increase in estimated fair value in fixed maturity securities was concentrated in U. S.  and foreign corporate securities and ABS (including RMBS backed by sub-prime mortgage loans) due to improving or stabilizing market conditions including an improvement in liquidity coupled with the effect of decreased interest rates on such securities.
providing license delivery and post-customer contract support services.
We then allocate these group costs between cost of license revenue and cost of maintenance and service revenue based on license and maintenance and service revenue reported.
Cost of license revenue.
Cost of license revenue includes costs related to products sold and software licensed, allocated operating costs related to product support and distribution costs, royalties paid to third party vendors, and the amortization of capitalized research and development costs associated with software products which have reached technological feasibility.
Cost of maintenance and service revenue.
Cost of maintenance and service revenue includes operating costs related to maintaining the infrastructure necessary to provide our professional consulting services, and costs associated with the delivery of services, such as production and customization services, hotline and on-site support, and documentation of maintenance updates.
Amortization of intangible assets.
Intangible assets are amortized to cost of revenue and operating expenses, and include the contract rights associated with certain contracts and core/developed technology, trademarks, trade names, customer relationships, covenants not to compete and other intangibles related to acquisitions.
Cost of revenue as a percentage of total revenue increased in fiscal 2011 compared to fiscal 2010 primarily due to the increase in professional service revenue.
The increase in cost of revenue in fiscal 2011 compared to fiscal 2010 was primarily due to an increase in $16.9 million in personnel-related costs as a result of headcount increases from our prior-year acquisitions, an increase of $18.9 million in costs to provide maintenance and professional services, an increase of $2.3 million in hardware and license costs, and an increase of $18.7 million for amortization of intangible assets due to our prioryear acquisitions.
Cost of revenue as a percentage of total revenue was 20% for fiscal years 2010 and 2009.
The increase in cost of revenue in fiscal 2010 compared to fiscal 2009 was primarily due to an increase of $3.4 million in intangibles amortization primarily as a result of our recent acquisitions, an increase of $1.1 million in travel related costs, an increase of $1.1 million in other direct costs and an increase of $1.6 million in functionally allocated expenses as previously described.
Operating Expenses Research and Development

<table><tr><td></td><td>Payments(Receipts) (In Millions)</td></tr><tr><td>Entergy Arkansas</td><td>$68</td></tr><tr><td>Entergy Louisiana</td><td>-$10</td></tr><tr><td>Entergy Mississippi</td><td>-$11</td></tr><tr><td>Entergy New Orleans</td><td>$2</td></tr><tr><td>Entergy Texas</td><td>-$49</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>Year Ended December 31,</td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td></tr><tr><td>Eurasia & Africa</td><td>$26</td><td>$2</td><td>$—</td></tr><tr><td>Europe</td><td>111</td><td>57</td><td>-3</td></tr><tr><td>Latin America</td><td>295</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>North America</td><td>281</td><td>277</td><td>255</td></tr><tr><td>Asia Pacific</td><td>38</td><td>47</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Bottling Investments</td><td>247</td><td>194</td><td>164</td></tr><tr><td>Corporate</td><td>185</td><td>318</td><td>30</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$1,183</td><td>$895</td><td>$447</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="4"> December 31, 2010</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">Fixed Maturity Securities</td><td colspan="2"> Equity   Securities</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="4"> (In millions)</td></tr><tr><td> Level 1:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets</td><td>$15,025</td><td>4.6%</td><td>$832</td><td>23.1%</td></tr><tr><td> Level 2:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Independent pricing source</td><td>257,625</td><td>78.7</td><td>616</td><td>17.1</td></tr><tr><td>Internal matrix pricing or discounted cash flow techniques</td><td>31,839</td><td>9.8</td><td>985</td><td>27.3</td></tr><tr><td>Significant other observable inputs</td><td>289,464</td><td>88.5</td><td>1,601</td><td>44.4</td></tr><tr><td> Level 3:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Independent pricing source</td><td>10,481</td><td>3.2</td><td>1,011</td><td>28.0</td></tr><tr><td>Internal matrix pricing or discounted cash flow techniques</td><td>9,872</td><td>3.0</td><td>149</td><td>4.1</td></tr><tr><td>Independent broker quotations</td><td>2,442</td><td>0.7</td><td>13</td><td>0.4</td></tr><tr><td>Significant unobservable inputs</td><td>22,795</td><td>6.9</td><td>1,173</td><td>32.5</td></tr><tr><td>Total estimated fair value</td><td>$327,284</td><td>100.0%</td><td>$3,606</td><td>100.0%</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="4"> December 31, 2010  Fair Value Measurements Using</td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Quoted Prices </td><td> Significant </td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td> in Active </td><td> Other </td><td> Significant </td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Markets for </td><td> Observable </td><td> Unobservable </td><td> Total </td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Identical Assets </td><td> Inputs </td><td> Inputs </td><td> Estimated </td></tr><tr><td></td><td> (Level 1)</td><td> (Level 2)</td><td> (Level 3)</td><td> Fair Value</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td colspan="2"> (In millions)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td> Fixed Maturity Securities:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>U.S. corporate securities</td><td>$—</td><td>$85,419</td><td>$7,149</td><td>$92,568</td></tr><tr><td>Foreign corporate securities</td><td>—</td><td>62,401</td><td>5,777</td><td>68,178</td></tr><tr><td>Residential mortgage-backed securities</td><td>274</td><td>43,037</td><td>1,422</td><td>44,733</td></tr><tr><td>Foreign government securities</td><td>149</td><td>40,092</td><td>3,159</td><td>43,400</td></tr><tr><td>U.S. Treasury, agency and government guaranteed securities</td><td>14,602</td><td>18,623</td><td>79</td><td>33,304</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial mortgage-backed securities (“CMBS”)</td><td>—</td><td>19,664</td><td>1,011</td><td>20,675</td></tr><tr><td>Asset-backed securities</td><td>—</td><td>10,142</td><td>4,148</td><td>14,290</td></tr><tr><td>State and political subdivision securities</td><td>—</td><td>10,083</td><td>46</td><td>10,129</td></tr><tr><td>Other fixed maturity securities</td><td>—</td><td>3</td><td>4</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>Total fixed maturity securities</td><td>$15,025</td><td>$289,464</td><td>$22,795</td><td>$327,284</td></tr><tr><td> Equity Securities:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Common stock</td><td>$832</td><td>$1,094</td><td>$268</td><td>$2,194</td></tr><tr><td>Non-redeemable preferred stock</td><td>—</td><td>507</td><td>905</td><td>1,412</td></tr><tr><td>Total equity securities</td><td>$832</td><td>$1,601</td><td>$1,173</td><td>$3,606</td></tr></table>

Question: Which Level is Independent pricing source for Fixed Maturity Securities in terms of rate at December 31, 2010 more between Level 2 and Level 3 ?
Answer: 2