{"pre_text": ["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 ) ."], "post_text": ["these payments were made in may 2014 .", "the lpsc , city council , and apsc have filed protests. ."], "table": [["", "payments ( receipts ) ( in millions )"], ["entergy arkansas", "$ 68"], ["entergy louisiana", "( $ 10 )"], ["entergy mississippi", "( $ 11 )"], ["entergy new orleans", "$ 2"], ["entergy texas", "( $ 49 )"]], "table_ori": [["", "Payments(Receipts) (In Millions)"], ["Entergy Arkansas", "$68"], ["Entergy Louisiana", "($10)"], ["Entergy Mississippi", "($11)"], ["Entergy New Orleans", "$2"], ["Entergy Texas", "($49)"]]}

Question: what is the difference in payments between entergy arkansas and entergy new orleans , in millions?
Evidence:
table_1: the entergy arkansas of payments ( receipts ) ( in millions ) is $ 68 ;
table_4: the entergy new orleans of payments ( receipts ) ( in millions ) is $ 2 ;
Program: subtract(68, 2)
Answer:
str_answer: 66
exe_answer: 66