Domestic utility companies and System Energy Notes to Respective Financial Statements (b) In 2003, the domestic utility companies and System Energy filed, with the IRS, a change in tax accounting method notification for their respective calculations of cost of goods sold.
The adjustment implemented a simplified method of allocation of overhead to the production of electricity, which is provided under the IRS capitalization regulations.
The cumulative adjustment placing these companies on the new methodology resulted in a $1.171 billion deduction for Entergy Arkansas, a $674 million deduction for Entergy Gulf States, a $505 million deduction for Entergy Louisiana, a $145 million deduction for Entergy Mississippi, a $31 million deduction for Entergy New Orleans, and a $430 million deduction for System Energy on Entergy's 2003 income tax return.
There was no cash benefit from the method change in 2003.
In 2004, Entergy Arkansas realized $173 million, Entergy Gulf States realized $69 million, Entergy Louisiana realized $100 million, Entergy Mississippi realized $36 million, and System Energy realized $144 million in cash tax benefit from the method change.
This tax accounting method change is an issue across the utility industry and will likely be challenged by the IRS on audit.
Entergy believes that its contingency provision established in its financial statements will sufficiently cover its risk associated with this issue.
Total income taxes differ from the amounts computed by applying the statutory income tax rate to income before taxes.
The reasons for the differences for the years 2004, 2003, and 2002 are:
## Table 0 ##
Entergy Arkansas
## Table 1 ##
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management's Financial Discussion and Analysis ?
base rate increases at Entergy Texas beginning May 2011 as a result of the settlement of the December 2009 rate case and effective July 2012 as a result of the PUCT’s order in the December 2011 rate case.
See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate cases.
These increases were partially offset by formula rate plan decreases at Entergy New Orleans effective October 2011 and at Entergy Gulf States Louisiana effective September 2012.
See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the formula rate plan decreases.
The Grand Gulf recovery variance is primarily due to increased recovery of higher costs resulting from the Grand Gulf uprate.
The net wholesale revenue variance is primarily due to decreased sales volume to municipal and co-op customers and lower prices.
The purchased power capacity variance is primarily due to price increases for ongoing purchased power capacity and additional capacity purchases.
The volume/weather variance is primarily due to decreased electricity usage, including the effect of milder weather as compared to the prior period on residential and commercial sales.
Hurricane Isaac, which hit the Utility’s service area in August 2012, also contributed to the decrease in electricity usage.
Billed electricity usage decreased a total of 1,684 GWh, or 2%, across all customer classes.
The Louisiana Act 55 financing savings obligation variance results from a regulatory charge recorded in 2012 because Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and Entergy Louisiana agreed to share the savings from an IRS settlement related to the uncertain tax position regarding the Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita Louisiana Act 55 financing with customers.
See Note 3 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the tax settlement.
Entergy Wholesale Commodities Following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2012 to 2011.
## Table 2 ##
As shown in the table above, net revenue for Entergy Wholesale Commodities decreased by $191 million, or 9%, in 2012 compared to 2011 primarily due to lower pricing in its contracts to sell power and lower volume in its nuclear fleet resulting from more unplanned and refueling outage days in 2012 as compared to 2011 which was partially offset by the exercise of resupply options provided for in purchase power agreements whereby Entergy Wholesale Commodities may elect to supply power from another source when the plant is not running.
Amounts related to the exercise of resupply options are included in the GWh billed in the table below.
Partially offsetting the lower net revenue from the nuclear fleet was higher net revenue from the Rhode Island State Energy Center, which was acquired in December 2011.
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Notes to Financial Statements
## Table 3 ##
The actual payments/receipts for 2014, based on calendar year 2013 production costs, will not be calculated until the Utility operating companies’ 2013 FERC Form 1s have been filed.
Once the calculation is completed, it will be filed at the FERC.
The level of any payments and receipts is significantly affected by a number of factors, including, among others, weather, the price of alternative fuels, the operating characteristics of the Entergy System generating fleet, and multiple factors affecting the calculation of the non-fuel related revenue requirement components of the total production costs, such as plant investment.
Entergy Arkansas is no longer a participant in the System Agreement and is not part of the calendar year 2013 production costs calculation.
Rough Production Cost Equalization Rates Each May since 2007 Entergy has filed with the FERC the rates to implement the FERC’s orders in the System Agreement proceeding.
These filings show the following payments/receipts among the Utility operating companies are necessary to achieve rough production cost equalization as defined by the FERC’s orders:

Tables referenced above, in order (Table 0 first):
<table><tr><td> 2004</td><td> Entergy  Arkansas</td><td> Entergy  Gulf States</td><td> Entergy  Louisiana</td><td> Entergy  Mississippi</td><td> Entergy  New Orleans</td><td> System  Energy</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="6">(In Thousands)</td></tr><tr><td>Computed at statutory rate -35%</td><td>$80,946</td><td>$105,194</td><td>$72,440</td><td>$38,688</td><td>$15,729</td><td>$64,386</td></tr><tr><td>Increases (reductions) in tax</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>resulting from:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>State income taxes net of</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>federal income tax effect</td><td>12,204</td><td>8,289</td><td>6,411</td><td>3,845</td><td>1,158</td><td>7,665</td></tr><tr><td>Regulatory differences -</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>utility plant items</td><td>13,775</td><td>6,951</td><td>10,052</td><td>-1,482</td><td>1,373</td><td>10,528</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization of investment</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>tax credits</td><td>-4,827</td><td>-5,316</td><td>-5,128</td><td>-1,405</td><td>-444</td><td>-3,476</td></tr><tr><td>Flow-through/permanent</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>differences</td><td>-9,127</td><td>-7,080</td><td>-3,576</td><td>-2,114</td><td>-878</td><td>-993</td></tr><tr><td>Other -- net</td><td>-3,907</td><td>250</td><td>-724</td><td>-492</td><td>-70</td><td>-97</td></tr><tr><td>Total income taxes</td><td>$89,064</td><td>$108,288</td><td>$79,475</td><td>$37,040</td><td>$16,868</td><td>$78,013</td></tr><tr><td>Effective Income Tax Rate</td><td>38.5%</td><td>36.0%</td><td>38.4%</td><td>33.5%</td><td>37.5%</td><td>42.4%</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td> 2003</td><td> Entergy  Arkansas</td><td> Entergy  Gulf States</td><td> Entergy  Louisiana</td><td> Entergy  Mississippi</td><td> Entergy  New Orleans</td><td> System  Energy</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="6">(In Thousands)</td></tr><tr><td>Computed at statutory rate -35%</td><td>$80,957</td><td>$18,934</td><td>$85,247</td><td>$35,522</td><td>$4,807</td><td>$63,647</td></tr><tr><td>Increases (reductions) in tax</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>resulting from:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>State income taxes net of</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>federal income tax effect</td><td>12,987</td><td>473</td><td>7,764</td><td>3,000</td><td>21</td><td>7,765</td></tr><tr><td>Regulatory differences -</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>utility plant items</td><td>15,994</td><td>13,260</td><td>10,568</td><td>-930</td><td>2,045</td><td>11,530</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization of investment</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>tax credits</td><td>-4,951</td><td>-8,797</td><td>-5,281</td><td>-1,404</td><td>-452</td><td>-3,476</td></tr><tr><td>Flow-through/permanent</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>differences</td><td>1,090</td><td>-10,625</td><td>-2,012</td><td>-1,112</td><td>-625</td><td>-420</td></tr><tr><td>Benefit of Entergy Corp. expenses</td><td>-1,145</td><td>-888</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-3,408</td></tr><tr><td>Other -- net</td><td>364</td><td>-821</td><td>1,122</td><td>-645</td><td>79</td><td>207</td></tr><tr><td>Total income taxes</td><td>$105,296</td><td>$11,536</td><td>$97,408</td><td>$34,431</td><td>$5,875</td><td>$75,845</td></tr><tr><td>Effective Income Tax Rate</td><td>45.5%</td><td>21.3%</td><td>40.0%</td><td>33.9%</td><td>42.8%</td><td>41.7%</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td>Amount (In Millions)</td></tr><tr><td>2011 net revenue</td><td>$2,045</td></tr><tr><td>Nuclear realized price changes</td><td>-194</td></tr><tr><td>Nuclear volume</td><td>-33</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>36</td></tr><tr><td>2012 net revenue</td><td>$1,854</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td>2014 Payments (Receipts) (In Millions)</td></tr><tr><td>Entergy Gulf States Louisiana</td><td>$—</td></tr><tr><td>Entergy Louisiana</td><td>$—</td></tr><tr><td>Entergy Mississippi</td><td>$—</td></tr><tr><td>Entergy New Orleans</td><td>-$16</td></tr><tr><td>Entergy Texas</td><td>$16</td></tr></table>

Question: what is the nuclear volume as a percentage of the decrease in net revenue from 2011 to 2012?
Answer: 0.17277
Reasoning program: subtract(2045,1854), divide(33,#0)