In Lloyd v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, 904 A.2d 1010 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2006), appeal denied, 591 Pa. 676, 916 A.2d 1104 (2007), the Court considered an argument that the Sustainable Energy Fund (SEF) programs should not be funded through electric distribution rates because the SEF programs benefit electric generation, not electric distribution, service. The Court commented that the Competition Act " only provides that it be funded by 'non-bypassable rates' without any requirement that it be by a rate that is directly benefited by the program." Id. at 1027. Thus, under Lloyd, there is no statutory requirement that the funding for special programs come only from those who benefit from the programs. However, the lack of such a requirement does not mean that funding for special programs must come from those who do not benefit. In fact, in Lloyd, this court pointed out that, according to the credible evidence, SEF programs do benefit distribution service. Therefore, SEF programs are funded by those who benefit from them.