Financial report context:
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 2019s 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 2019s 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 2019s 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 2019s 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 2019s determinations regarding interest . in april 2014 the lpsc filed a petition for review of the ferc 2019s 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 2019s february 2014 orders . the filing shows the following net payments and receipts , including interest , among the utility operating companies : payments ( receipts ) ( in millions ) .

Financial table:
payments ( receipts ) ( in millions ): entergy arkansas; column_2: $ 68
payments ( receipts ) ( in millions ): entergy louisiana; column_2: ( $ 10 )
payments ( receipts ) ( in millions ): entergy mississippi; column_2: ( $ 11 )
payments ( receipts ) ( in millions ): entergy new orleans; column_2: $ 2
payments ( receipts ) ( in millions ): entergy texas; column_2: ( $ 49 )

Additional report context:
these payments were made in may 2014 . the lpsc , city council , and apsc have filed protests. .

Question: what is the difference in payments between entergy arkansas and entergy new orleans , in millions?
Answer: 66