Utah and Arizona Passed ADAS Glass Laws Before Florida, and Almost Nobody Counts Them
Short answer: the usual telling of this story starts with Florida, May 2023, then Kentucky, then the NCOIL model act, then everyone else. It is wrong at the front. Utah has required written ADAS recalibration disclosure since 2020. Arizona since 2022. Both verified against the states' own enacted texts.
We are not pointing at anyone. Our own ADAS guide told readers to ignore the roundups listing Utah (correct about the bill those roundups cited, wrong about the state), until we corrected it while writing this.
The record
Utah Code 41-6a-1645, enacted by Laws of Utah 2020, Chapter 267, amended by S.B. 78 (2021), which added 41-6a-1646.
A glass company must tell the customer in writing, before the work, whether recalibration is required and whether it will be performed; must meet or exceed manufacturer specification; and must notify the customer if a recalibration failed or was skipped, with a referral to a dealer or qualified facility. Breach is an infraction and a $500 civil penalty, with a private action carrying a minimum award.
Arizona A.R.S. 20-463.02, added by S.B. 1410 (55th Legislature, 2nd Regular Session, 2022).
The same notice sequence, plus one thing Utah does not have: when a recalibration fails, notice is owed to the insurer as well as the customer. Civil penalty $2,500, enforced under the insurance article.
That is three years and one year respectively before Florida.
Why the miss happened, which is the useful part
Two reasons, and both are worth knowing because they will cause the next miss too.
They are filed in the wrong place to be found. Utah's sits in Title 41, Motor Vehicles, not the insurance code. Arizona's sits in the insurance title but was added by a bill nobody was tracking as a glass bill. Anyone sweeping state insurance codes for "auto glass" legislation finds Florida and misses Utah entirely. The subject is not where the subject is filed.
The tracking is bill-shaped, not law-shaped. Industry trackers follow bills in the current session. A duty enacted in 2020 stopped being news in 2020 and never appears again. So a shop reading a 2026 roundup sees a wave starting in 2023 and reasonably concludes their state is not affected, when the duty may have been on the books for five years.
There is a third, smaller trap. At least one roundup credits Utah H.B. 119 with ADAS provisions. It does not have any: the enrolled bill amends Utah Code 31A-22-317 and 31A-22-319 and is about disclosure of non-OEM aftermarket crash parts. So the roundups citing Utah are simultaneously right that Utah belongs on the list and wrong about why, and correcting the citation, as we originally did, drops the state off the list altogether. That is how we got it wrong.
What the older laws have that the model act does not
This is the part that should interest anyone weighing whether the national model is good for the trade.
Both Utah and Arizona expressly free the shop from OEM-dictated glass, tooling and equipment while still requiring calibration to OEM specification, Utah 41-6a-1645(4)(a), Arizona 20-463.02(E)(1). The NCOIL model contains no such clause. A substantive pro-aftermarket provision, and it is in the two oldest laws rather than the newest.
Utah alone reaches resale. Section 41-6a-1645(6) makes it unlawful to sell a vehicle you know has an inoperable or uncalibrated ADAS without written notice to the buyer, with a private action for the greater of actual damages or $1,500. No other state we have read extends the duty past the repair transaction.
Neither has an assignment-of-benefits ban. That matters, because it separates two things the coverage tends to merge. The ADAS notice duty and the glass-claims-fraud apparatus are different projects. Utah and Arizona did the first without the second. What Florida, Kentucky and the model added was the second: the AOB ban, the inducement ban, the claim-number gate, the reasonable-and-customary cap.
So if your legislature takes up the model, you are not mainly getting a calibration-disclosure law. You are getting a glass-claims law with a calibration-disclosure section inside it. The states that did calibration disclosure on its own did it years earlier and wrote it more favourably to the shop.
A citation warning from the same check
Arizona's Senate fact sheet of 7 February 2022 states a $500 civil penalty. The enacted statute says $2,500. The figure was raised during passage and the fact sheet was never updated.
Cite A.R.S. 20-463.02, not the fact sheet. This generalises: fact sheets and bill summaries describe the introduced version and outlive it on the open web, where they rank well and read authoritatively.
The current count
Nine states can hold a glass shop to a written ADAS disclosure duty today: Utah (2020), Arizona (2022), Florida (2023), Kentucky (2024), Iowa (2025), Louisiana (2026), Virginia, New York and Maryland.
If you work in Utah or Arizona and have been treating this as a future compliance question, it is not. It has been in force for years, and in Utah it reaches vehicles you sell as well as vehicles you repair.
How this was verified
Both statutes were read from the states' own published texts, along with the session-law chapter tying Arizona S.B. 1410 to 20-463.02. The full fifty-state map with an evidence tier on every row is in the auto glass disclosure guide; the same data is machine-readable at /api/glass-laws.json, and ?status=adas returns exactly these nine.
- Auto glass disclosure laws by state
- The NCOIL model act and the section it leaves blank
- ADAS calibration laws by state
General consumer information: not legal, insurance, or financial advice. Requirements, coverage, and practices vary by state, policy, and manufacturer.