Utah
Utah GPS Tracking Laws: Is It Legal to Put a Tracker on a Car? (2026)
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited June 17, 2026). · Law checked current as of August 9, 2026. How we verify our legal content
Utah rewrote its tracking device law twice in two years, and the 2026 version is one of the broadest in the country. What used to be a narrow rule about hiding a GPS unit on someone else's car now also covers slipping an AirTag into a backpack and loading a tracking app onto someone's phone.
So is it legal to put a tracker on a car in Utah? Only if the car is yours, or you fit one of a short list of exceptions. Get it wrong and you face a class A misdemeanor plus a civil lawsuit with damages written directly into the statute.
Is It Legal to Put a GPS Tracker on a Car in Utah?
Putting a GPS tracker on a car you own or lease is legal in Utah. The statute targets vehicles "owned or leased by another," so your own vehicle is outside it.
Putting a tracker on someone else's car without the owner's or lessee's permission is a crime. Utah Code 76-12-305 makes it a class A misdemeanor, and it does not matter whether the target is your spouse, your ex, a business rival, or a stranger.
Consent is also revocable. If the owner or lessee agreed to the tracker and later tells you to stop, continuing to track after that point is its own violation.
The federal layer matters too. In United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (2012), the Supreme Court held that when police attach a GPS device to a car and use it to track the car’s movements, that is a Fourth Amendment search. And if tracking is part of a pattern of harassment that crosses state lines or uses interstate networks, the federal stalking statute, 18 U.S.C. 2261A, can apply on top of state charges.
Utah's Tracking Law Just Got Much Broader
Two recent changes make most older articles about Utah tracking law unreliable.
First, the renumbering. Utah's tracking offense lived for years at Utah Code 76-9-408. Effective May 7, 2025, the Legislature moved it to 76-12-305, "Unlawful use of a tracking device or tracking application." If a website, demand letter, or police report still cites 76-9-408, it is pointing at a section that no longer exists under that number.
Second, the expansion. Chapter 442 of the 2026 General Session substantially rewrote the offense effective May 6, 2026. The statute now reaches three kinds of conduct:
- Vehicles. Installing a tracking device on a motor vehicle owned or leased by another person without the owner's or lessee's permission, or continuing to track after consent is revoked.
- People and their belongings. Placing a tracking device on an individual's person or on their tangible personal property without permission. That covers an AirTag dropped into a purse, a tracker sewn into a jacket, or a tile slipped into a child's backpack by a non-custodial adult.
- Tracking apps. Using a tracking application on a device in an individual's possession, such as installing stalkerware on a phone or quietly enabling location sharing without the user's knowledge.
The statute excludes anonymized telematics that vehicle manufacturers and dealers collect as part of normal connected-car operations. Your car maker's diagnostic pings are not what this law is about.
Who Can Legally Track in Utah
Utah Code 76-12-305 lists specific exceptions. If you do not fit one, you need the owner's, lessee's, or individual's permission.
- Vehicle owners. You can track a vehicle you own, including when you lend it to a friend or family member. Lending is not leasing: if you lease the vehicle to someone, the lessee's rights take over.
- Parents and guardians of minors. A parent or legal guardian may track their minor child only if that parent has received permission from any other parent or legal guardian of the minor. Subsection (5)(b) joins the tracking and the permission with "and," so the permission is a required element of the exception rather than a courtesy, and nothing in the statute limits it to shared-custody situations. A parent who tracks a minor without the other parent's or guardian's permission falls outside the exception entirely and commits a class A misdemeanor. Where the exception does apply, the authority continues after the child turns 18 until the adult child revokes it.
- Caregivers of vulnerable adults. A caregiver may track a vulnerable adult in their care.
- Police and courts. A peace officer is exempt only when installing or placing a tracking device in the course of a criminal investigation or pursuant to a court order, not simply while acting within their official duties generally. Anyone acting under a court order is also exempt. Under Jones, police attaching a GPS device to a car and using it to track the car’s movements is a Fourth Amendment search (see our GPS tracking overview).
- Rental companies. Motor vehicle rental companies can track their own fleet vehicles.
- Licensed private investigators, with a catch. Utah added one of the most unusual safeguards in the country. A licensed PI may place a tracker on a motor vehicle for a legitimate business purpose only after confirming, through a state entity with access to protective order records, that the vehicle's owner or lessee and their family members are not protected by any protective order. A PI must also disclose the purpose of the tracking device on request. Through August 31, 2026 that request comes from the Bureau of Criminal Identification; an amendment effective September 1, 2026 moves the disclosure duty to the Division of Professional Licensing and widens "protective order" to include a jail release court order. A PI who skips the check is committing the same misdemeanor as anyone else.
The protective order check exists because of a grim pattern: abusers hiring investigators to locate victims who fled. Utah closed that door by statute.
Can My Employer Track My Car in Utah?
If you drive a company-owned vehicle, your employer can track it. The company is the owner, and the statute lets owners track their own vehicles. Utah has no statute requiring employers to give notice of GPS on company vehicles, though most do in their policies.
Your personal car is a different story. An employer who hides a tracker on an employee's personally owned vehicle without permission commits a class A misdemeanor like anyone else.
The 2026 expansion raised the stakes further. Because the statute now covers a person's tangible personal property and tracking apps on devices in their possession, an employer who slips a tracker into an employee's bag, or pushes location-monitoring software onto an employee's personal phone without consent, is also inside the criminal statute.
Workplace surveillance questions rarely stop at GPS. For cameras and audio on the job, see our guide to Utah recording laws and the rules for surveillance camera laws by state.
AirTags, Personal Property, and Tracking Apps
Before May 2026, Utah's tracking statute only spoke clearly about motor vehicles. Dropping an AirTag into someone's coat pocket fell into a gap that prosecutors had to fill with the stalking statute.
That gap is closed. Placing any tracking device on a person or on their tangible personal property without permission is now a class A misdemeanor, and so is using a tracking application on a device they possess. Stalkerware on a phone, a Bluetooth tag in luggage, and a GPS puck in a stroller all sit squarely inside the statute.
Utah's stalking law, Utah Code 76-5-106.5, still applies alongside it. That statute defines stalking to include monitoring a person "by any action, method, device, or means" as part of a course of conduct that would cause a reasonable person fear or emotional distress. Repeated tracking can support stalking charges, a stalking injunction, or both.
Penalties for Illegal GPS Tracking in Utah
| Conduct | Charge | Maximum penalty |
|---|---|---|
| Unlawful tracking device or tracking app (Utah Code 76-12-305) | Class A misdemeanor | 364 days in jail and a $2,500 fine |
| Stalking, first offense (Utah Code 76-5-106.5) | Class A misdemeanor | 364 days in jail and a $2,500 fine |
| Stalking with a qualifying prior conviction, in violation of a permanent criminal stalking injunction, or by a cohabitant of the victim | Third degree felony | Up to 5 years in prison and a $5,000 fine |
| Stalking using a dangerous weapon or force likely to produce death or serious bodily injury, or with two or more prior stalking convictions, among other repeat-offense triggers in 76-5-106.5(3)(c) | Second degree felony | 1 to 15 years in prison and a $10,000 fine |
| Federal interstate stalking (18 U.S.C. 2261A) | Federal felony | Up to 5 years in federal prison, more with aggravating factors |
A class A misdemeanor is Utah's most serious misdemeanor level, one step below a felony. Prosecutors can stack charges where tracking is part of a broader stalking pattern, and the felony tiers above show how quickly a repeat tracking case can escalate past the misdemeanor ceiling.
Suing for Illegal Tracking: Utah's Built-In Damages
Most states force tracking victims to improvise a lawsuit out of invasion of privacy or trespass claims. Utah wrote the cause of action directly into the criminal statute.
Under subsections (8) through (11) of Utah Code 76-12-305, a person who is unlawfully tracked can sue the tracker and recover:
- An injunction ordering the tracking to stop and the device or app removed.
- Compensatory or statutory damages equal to the greater of $50 for each day of unlawful tracking or $5,000. A tracker hidden for four months is worth more than $6,000 before anything else is counted.
- Attorney fees and costs, which makes these cases viable for ordinary people, not just those who can fund litigation.
- Punitive damages, which courts can add for egregious conduct.
One more provision with teeth: an acquittal in the criminal case does not bar the civil claim. Even if a prosecutor declines to file or a jury acquits, the victim can still sue and win under the lower civil burden of proof.
What to Do If You Find a Tracker in Utah
- Do not destroy it. The device is evidence. Photograph it where you found it, including the mounting spot, before touching anything.
- Document everything. Save photos, dates, locations where you found it, and any pattern of someone knowing where you have been.
- Call local police or the sheriff. Report it under Utah Code 76-12-305 and ask for a case number. Mention the statute by its new number, since some older reference materials still list 76-9-408.
- Check your phone and accounts. The 2026 law covers tracking apps too. Review location sharing settings, unfamiliar apps, and account logins.
- Consider a protective order. If the tracker is connected to a current or former partner, a stalking injunction or protective order adds criminal consequences to any further contact. Our guide to Utah restraining order laws walks through the process.
- Talk to a lawyer about the civil claim. With statutory damages and attorney fees available, many Utah attorneys will take a strong tracking case.
For rules in other states, see our full guide to GPS Tracking Laws by State.
Sources
- Utah Code 76-12-305, Unlawful use of a tracking device or tracking application, Utah State Legislature
- Utah Code 76-12-305, version effective September 1, 2026 (Amended by Chapter 44, 2026 General Session), Utah State Legislature
- Utah Code Title 76, Chapter 12, Part 3, Utah State Legislature
- Utah Code 76-5-106.5, Stalking, Utah State Legislature
- Utah Code 76-3-203, Felony conviction, indeterminate term of imprisonment, Utah State Legislature
- Utah Code 76-3-301, Fines of individuals, Utah State Legislature
- United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (2012), Supreme Court of the United States
- 18 U.S.C. 2261A, Stalking, Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
Disclaimer: This article is general legal information, not legal advice. Statutes change and every situation is different. If you are dealing with tracking or stalking, contact a Utah attorney or call local law enforcement. If you are in immediate danger, call 911.
More Utah Laws
- Utah Dashcam Laws
- Utah Data Privacy Laws
- Utah Drone Laws
- Utah Employee Monitoring Laws
- Utah Recording Laws
- Utah Restraining Order Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Is it legal to put a GPS tracker on my spouse's car in Utah?
Only if you are an owner or lessee of that vehicle. If the car is titled or leased solely in your spouse's name, hiding a tracker on it without permission is a class A misdemeanor under Utah Code 76-12-305, and it exposes you to the statute's civil damages. Courts in divorce cases also take a dim view of secret surveillance.
Can I track my teenager's phone or car in Utah?
Only with permission from any other parent or legal guardian of that minor. Utah Code 76-12-305(5)(b) exempts a parent or guardian who tracks a minor and who has received that permission, so the permission is a required element of the exception rather than a suggestion, and the statute does not limit it to shared-custody situations. A parent who tracks a minor without it falls outside the exception and commits a class A misdemeanor, which matters most to separated and divorced parents. Where the exception does apply, the authority continues after the child turns 18 until the adult child revokes it, so a college student can simply tell a parent to turn it off, and continuing after that revocation violates the statute.
Is putting an AirTag in someone's bag illegal in Utah?
Yes, as of May 6, 2026. The expanded statute covers placing a tracking device on a person or on their tangible personal property without permission. Before the expansion, prosecutors had to rely on the stalking statute. Now the AirTag itself is the crime.
What happened to Utah Code 76-9-408?
It was renumbered. Utah's tracking offense moved from 76-9-408 to 76-12-305 effective May 7, 2025, and was then substantially expanded in the 2026 General Session. Any source still citing 76-9-408 is out of date and likely describes the older, vehicle-only version of the law.
Can a private investigator legally put a tracker on my car in Utah?
Only under narrow conditions. A licensed PI may track a motor vehicle for a legitimate business purpose, but first must confirm through a state entity with access to protective order records that the vehicle's owner or lessee and their family members are not protected by any protective order, and must disclose the purpose of the tracking device on request. That request comes from the Bureau of Criminal Identification through August 31, 2026, and from the Division of Professional Licensing once an amendment takes effect September 1, 2026. A PI who skips the protective order check commits the same class A misdemeanor as anyone else.
How much can I sue for if someone tracked me illegally in Utah?
The statute sets a floor: the greater of $50 per day of unlawful tracking or $5,000, plus attorney fees and costs, plus an injunction. Courts can also award punitive damages. A criminal acquittal does not block the civil case.
Can my employer put tracking software on my personal phone?
Not without your consent. The 2026 expansion makes it a class A misdemeanor to use a tracking application on a device in your possession without permission. Tracking on company-owned phones and vehicles is the employer's right as owner, so the line is ownership and consent.
Do rental car companies have to tell me about GPS in Utah?
Rental companies are expressly excepted from the tracking statute for their own fleet vehicles, so the tracking itself is lawful. Disclosure practices live in your rental agreement rather than in this statute, so read the contract if it matters to you.
Updates
Corrected the description of United States v. Jones to the holding the Court actually reached: attaching a GPS device to a car and using it to track the car is a Fourth Amendment search; the Court did not decide whether a warrant was required.
Corrected the parent and guardian tracking exception to state that permission from any other parent or legal guardian is a required element of the exception rather than a suggestion limited to shared custody, added the second degree felony stalking tier that the penalty table had omitted, and flagged the September 1, 2026 amendment moving the private investigator disclosure duty from the Bureau of Criminal Identification to the Division of Professional Licensing.
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Corrected the stalking felony-escalation penalty row and the police exemption description to match Utah Code 76-5-106.5 and 76-12-305's actual triggers.
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Utah Code, Title 76: Criminal Offenses
§ 76-12-305Unlawful use of a tracking device or tracking application.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
(1) (a) As used in this section: (i) "Minor" means an individual who is younger than 18 years old. (ii) "Motor vehicle" means the same as that term is defined in Subsection 41-12a-103(4). (iii) "Private investigator" means an individual who is: (A) licensed as a private investigator under Title 53, Chapter 9, Private Investigator Regulation Act; and (B) acting in the capacity of a private investigator. (iv) "Protective order" means a protective order, stalking injunction, or restraining order issued by a court of any jurisdiction. (v) "Rental company" means the same as that term is defined in Section 76-6-410.5. (vi) (A) "Tangible personal property" means a physical asset or object that can be seen, touched, and moved. (B) "Tangible personal property" does not include a motor vehicle. (vii) "Tracking application" means a software program that can be used to track or identify the location or movement of an individual. (viii) (A) "Tracking device" means a device used for the primary purpose of revealing the device's location or movement by the transmission or recording of an electronic signal.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-26 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at le.utah.gov
Also relied on in: Utah Employee Monitoring Laws: Workplace Surveillance and Social Media (2026)
§ 76-5-106.5Stalking -- Definitions -- Injunction -- Penalties -- Duties of law enforcement officer.In force
(1) (a) As used in this section: (i) "Course of conduct" means two or more acts directed at or toward a specific individual, including: (A) acts in which the actor follows, monitors, observes, photographs, surveils, threatens, or communicates to or about an individual, or interferes with an individual's property: (I) directly, indirectly, or through any third party; and (II) by any action, method, device, or means; or (B) when the actor engages in any of the following acts or causes someone else to engage in any of these acts: (I) approaches or confronts an individual; (II) appears at the individual's workplace or contacts the individual's employer or coworker; (III) appears at an individual's residence or contacts an individual's neighbor, or enters property owned, leased, or occupied by an individual; (IV) sends material by any means to the individual or for the purpose of obtaining or disseminating information about or communicating with the individual to a member of the individual's family or household, employer, coworker, friend, or associate of the individual; (V) places an object on or delivers an object to property owned, leased, or occupied by an individual, or…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at le.utah.gov
Cited in 52 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Bailey v. Bayles (Utah Supreme Court 2002, 450 Utah Adv. Rep. 34)“…reaching its conclusion. First, the trial court looked to Utah Code Ann. § 76-5-106.5 (2) (1999), the Utah criminal stalking…”
- Baird v. Baird (Utah Supreme Court 2014, 2014 UT 8)“…on of emotional distress contained in the 2008 amendment to Utah Code section 76-5-106.5(2) (Stalking Statute) to determine whet…”
- Salt Lake City v. Lopez (Court of Appeals of Utah 1997, 313 Utah Adv. Rep. 26)“…ction for stalking, a class B misdemeanor, in violation of Utah Code Ann. § 76-5-106.5 (1995). Defendant contends the stalkin…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 76-3-203Felony conviction -- Indeterminate term of imprisonment.In forcecited in 8 of our articles
A person who has been convicted of a felony may be sentenced to imprisonment for an indeterminate term as follows: (1) In the case of a felony of the first degree, unless the statute provides otherwise, for a term of not less than five years and which may be for life. (2) In the case of a felony of the second degree, unless the statute provides otherwise, for a term of not less than one year nor more than 15 years. (3) In the case of a felony of the third degree, unless the statute provides otherwise, for a term not to exceed five years.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at le.utah.gov
Cited in 79 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2024
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Speer (Utah Supreme Court 1988, 74 Utah Adv. Rep. 16)“…avated assault. In sentencing defendant, the judge applied Utah Code Ann. § 76-3-203 (1) (1978), which adds an additional ye…”
- State v. Alvarez (Utah Supreme Court 1994, 235 Utah Adv. Rep. 61)“…"not less than five years ... and which may be for life." Utah Code Ann. § 76-3-203 . For first degree felonies, section 76…”
- State v. Labrum (Utah Supreme Court 1996, 293 Utah Adv. Rep. 19)“…firearm and gang sentence enhancements in accordance with Utah Code Ann. §§ 76-3-203 and 76-3-203.1. The gang sentence enha…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Utah Smart Glasses Recording Laws (2026), Utah Recording Laws (2026): One-Party Consent Rules, Utah Age of Consent Laws: Statutes, Penalties and Reporting
§ 76-3-301Fines of individuals.In forcecited in 8 of our articles
(1) An individual convicted of an offense may be sentenced to pay a fine, not exceeding: (a) $10,000 for a felony conviction of the first degree or second degree; (b) $5,000 for a felony conviction of the third degree; (c) $2,500 for a class A misdemeanor conviction; (d) $1,000 for a class B misdemeanor conviction; (e) $750 for a class C misdemeanor conviction or infraction conviction; and (f) any greater amounts specifically authorized by statute. (2) (a) An individual convicted of a misdemeanor or infraction and sentenced to pay a fine may not be charged by a court: (i) notwithstanding Section 15-1-4, interest on the judgment that in the aggregate is more than 25% of the initial fine; or (ii) that issues an order to show cause under Section 78B-6-317 for failure to pay the fine, interest that is more than 25% of the initial fine. (b) An individual convicted only of an infraction and sentenced to pay a fine may not be charged: (i) by the Office of State Debt Collection, late fees and interest that in the aggregate are more than 25% of the initial fine; or (ii) by a third-party debt contractor of the Office of State Debt Collection, additional fees.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at le.utah.gov
Cited in 9 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Weeks (Utah Supreme Court 2002, 458 Utah Adv. Rep. 3)“…on), the judge could have fined Weeks up to $12,500, see Utah Code Ann. § 76-3-301 (b) to (e) (1999) (stating that a perso…”
- State v. Mitchell (Court of Appeals of Utah 1991, 175 Utah Adv. Rep. 77)“…of a firearm. Defendant was also fined $10,000 pursuant to Utah Code Ann. § 76-3-301 (a) (1990). Defendant claimed hi…”
- Planned Parenthood Association v. State (Utah Supreme Court 2024, 554 P.3d 998)“…sk of monetary fines and up to fifteen years in prison. See UTAH CODE §§ 76-3-301(1)(a), 76-7a-201(3). SB 174 further req…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Utah Felony Degrees and Misdemeanor Classes: Sentences and Fines, Utah Fireworks Laws (2026): Dates, Hours, and Penalties, Utah Manslaughter and Automobile Homicide Laws (2026)
United States Code Title 18
§ 2261AStalkingIn forcecited in 56 of our articles
Whoever— travels in interstate or foreign commerce or is present within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or enters or leaves Indian country, with the intent to kill, injure, harass, intimidate, or place under surveillance with intent to kill, injure, harass, or intimidate another person, and in the course of, or as a result of, such travel or presence engages in conduct that— places that person in reasonable fear of the death of, or serious bodily injury to— that person; an immediate family member (as defined in section 115) of that person; a spouse or intimate partner of that person; or the pet, service animal, emotional support animal, or horse of that person; or causes, attempts to cause, or would be reasonably expected to cause substantial emotional distress to a person described in clause (i), (ii), or (iii) of subparagraph (A); or with the intent to kill, injure, harass, intimidate, or place under surveillance with intent to kill, injure, harass, or intimidate another person, uses the mail, any interactive computer service or electronic communication service or electronic communication system of interstate commerce, or any other…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 350 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Federal appeals courts have construed and upheld Section 2261A. United States v. Walker (2011) read in the course of, or as a result of such travel disjunctively, so pre-travel threats plus resulting fear sufficed. United States v. Amy Gonzalez (2018) held it neither overbroad nor vague and no First Amendment violation as applied.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- United States v. Walker (Court of Appeals for the First Circuit 2011, 665 F.3d 212)✓After emailing threats to his estranged wife, the defendant flew from Michigan to Puerto Rico and was arrested on arrival. The court read the disjunctive phrase in 2261A(1) to cover travel that itself places the target in reasonable fear, and upheld the stalking conviction.
- United States v. Amy Gonzalez (Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 2018, 905 F.3d 165)✓Relatives waged a years-long campaign against a mother that ended in a courthouse shooting. The court held 2261A is neither overbroad nor vague because it reaches harassing conduct, and that the mental states it lists are alternative means, not elements; convictions affirmed.
- United States v. Wills (Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit 2003, 346 F.3d 476)✓A burglary suspect pursued the witness who identified him at a preliminary hearing; the witness later died. The court held the evidence met each element of 2261A: travel from D.C. to Virginia, intent to harm or harass, and reasonable fear of death; conviction affirmed.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Federal Sexting Laws: Legal Consequences and Penalties, GPS Tracking Laws by State: Is It Legal to Put a Tracker on a Car? (2026), Alabama GPS Tracking Laws: Is It Legal to Put a Tracker on a Car? (2026)
Explore the law
This article also draws on these acts and chapters (opening at their first section): Utah Code, Title 76: Criminal Offenses § 76-12-101 (Definitions.)
Related law for further reading — not part of this article’s citations.
Sources and References
- Utah Code 76-12-305 - Unlawful use of a tracking device or tracking application(le.utah.gov)
- Utah Code Title 76, Chapter 12, Part 3(le.utah.gov)
- Utah Code 76-5-106.5 - Stalking(le.utah.gov)
- United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (2012)(supremecourt.gov)
- 18 U.S.C. 2261A - Federal stalking statute(law.cornell.edu)
- Utah Code 76-12-305, version effective September 1, 2026 (Amended by Chapter 44, 2026 General Session)(le.utah.gov)
- Utah Code 76-3-203 - Felony conviction, indeterminate term of imprisonment(le.utah.gov)
- Utah Code 76-3-301 - Fines of individuals(le.utah.gov)