HB998 revises Georgia’s telecommunications regulation framework for certain local exchange companies, especially Tier 2 providers. The bill allows eligible Tier 2 local exchange companies to elect rate-of-return regulation by filing a certification with the Public Service Commission by August 1, 2026, and it restricts those companies from switching back to the alternative regulatory model before August 1, 2031. It also preserves prior elections made before July 1, 2026, and maintains existing provisions governing alternative regulation for Tier 1 companies.
The bill makes substantial changes to the Universal Access Fund. It extends and limits how fund distributions may be made, requires companies seeking reimbursement to submit detailed financial information including unredacted audited financial reports, and caps total fund distributions at $50 million per fund year for costs incurred on or after July 1, 2026. It also requires proportional reductions if requests exceed the cap, allows continued processing of pre-July 1, 2026 claims without the new cap, and bars distributions for expenses incurred after December 31, 2040. In addition, the bill requires the Public Service Commission to submit biennial reports on the fund’s finances, contributions, disbursements, access lines, and recipients.
HB998’s impact on state law is to tighten oversight of telecommunications subsidies while giving certain smaller local exchange carriers a new regulatory option. It changes Code Sections 46-5-165, 46-5-166, and 46-5-167 in Title 46, affecting how rates are regulated, how switched access and basic local exchange service costs are recovered, and how the Universal Access Fund is administered. The bill also imposes new disclosure and reporting requirements on carriers that seek reimbursement from the fund and sets new monetary and temporal limits on support.
The general sentiment around the bill appears strongly favorable. It passed the House by a wide margin, 159-2, and the Senate by 47-2, indicating broad bipartisan support. The Senate also approved procedural motions by narrower margins, suggesting some debate over process, but not over final passage.
The main points of contention likely centered on the new limits and oversight requirements for Universal Access Fund reimbursements, including the $50 million annual cap, the requirement to disclose unredacted audited financial statements, and the long-term restriction on switching regulatory regimes. These provisions affect local exchange companies, the Public Service Commission, and consumers who help fund the program through telecommunications charges.
HB998 amends Georgia telecommunications law in Title 46 by expanding the regulatory options available to eligible Tier 2 local exchange companies and by tightening the rules governing the Universal Access Fund. It authorizes certain Tier 2 carriers to elect rate-of-return regulation, imposes a lock-in period before they can return to alternative regulation, requires detailed financial disclosures for fund reimbursement, caps annual fund distributions at $50 million for new costs beginning July 1, 2026, and mandates recurring commission reports to state leaders.
The bill appears to have enjoyed broad support in both chambers, as reflected by overwhelming final passage votes in the House and Senate. The large margins suggest the legislation was viewed as a technical but important update to telecommunications regulation and fund administration. The smaller procedural votes in the Senate indicate some disagreement over parliamentary handling, but not enough to threaten passage.
The likely areas of disagreement were the new reimbursement cap, the requirement that carriers provide unredacted audited financial statements and parent-company information, and the restrictions on future regulatory elections for eligible Tier 2 companies. Carriers receiving Universal Access Fund support may have viewed the added disclosure and funding limits as burdensome, while supporters likely saw them as necessary safeguards for public funds and ratepayer protection. The procedural Senate votes also suggest some members objected to how the bill was being advanced, even though final passage was not close.