entergy mississippi , inc .management 2019s financial discussion and analysis entergy mississippi 2019s receivables from or ( payables to ) the money pool were as follows as of december 31 for each of the following years. .
[['2016', '2015', '2014', '2013'], ['( in thousands )', '( in thousands )', '( in thousands )', '( in thousands )'], ['$ 10595', '$ 25930', '$ 644', '( $ 3536 )']]
see note 4 to the financial statements for a description of the money pool .entergy mississippi has four separate credit facilities in the aggregate amount of $ 102.5 million scheduled to expire may 2017 .no borrowings were outstanding under the credit facilities as of december 31 , 2016 .in addition , entergy mississippi is a party to an uncommitted letter of credit facility as a means to post collateral to support its obligations under miso .as of december 31 , 2016 , a $ 7.1 million letter of credit was outstanding under entergy mississippi 2019s uncommitted letter of credit facility .see note 4 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the credit facilities .entergy mississippi obtained authorizations from the ferc through october 2017 for short-term borrowings not to exceed an aggregate amount of $ 175 million at any time outstanding and long-term borrowings and security issuances .see note 4 to the financial statements for further discussion of entergy mississippi 2019s short-term borrowing limits .state and local rate regulation and fuel-cost recovery the rates that entergy mississippi charges for electricity significantly influence its financial position , results of operations , and liquidity .entergy mississippi is regulated and the rates charged to its customers are determined in regulatory proceedings .a governmental agency , the mpsc , is primarily responsible for approval of the rates charged to customers .formula rate plan in june 2014 , entergy mississippi filed its first general rate case before the mpsc in almost 12 years .the rate filing laid out entergy mississippi 2019s plans for improving reliability , modernizing the grid , maintaining its workforce , stabilizing rates , utilizing new technologies , and attracting new industry to its service territory .entergy mississippi requested a net increase in revenue of $ 49 million for bills rendered during calendar year 2015 , including $ 30 million resulting from new depreciation rates to update the estimated service life of assets .in addition , the filing proposed , among other things : 1 ) realigning cost recovery of the attala and hinds power plant acquisitions from the power management rider to base rates ; 2 ) including certain miso-related revenues and expenses in the power management rider ; 3 ) power management rider changes that reflect the changes in costs and revenues that will accompany entergy mississippi 2019s withdrawal from participation in the system agreement ; and 4 ) a formula rate plan forward test year to allow for known changes in expenses and revenues for the rate effective period .entergy mississippi proposed maintaining the current authorized return on common equity of 10.59% ( 10.59 % ) .in october 2014 , entergy mississippi and the mississippi public utilities staff entered into and filed joint stipulations that addressed the majority of issues in the proceeding .the stipulations provided for : 2022 an approximate $ 16 million net increase in revenues , which reflected an agreed upon 10.07% ( 10.07 % ) return on common equity ; 2022 revision of entergy mississippi 2019s formula rate plan by providing entergy mississippi with the ability to reflect known and measurable changes to historical rate base and certain expense amounts ; resolving uncertainty around and obviating the need for an additional rate filing in connection with entergy mississippi 2019s withdrawal from participation in the system agreement ; updating depreciation rates ; and moving costs associated with the attala and hinds generating plants from the power management rider to base rates; .

Question: the company requested a net increase in revenue for bills rendered during calendar year 2015 . what would the increase have been , in millions , without the amount reflating to the new depreciation rates?
Answer: 19