Water Sprinkler Efficiency Requirements
HB 330 creates a new chapter in Utah law governing spray sprinkler bodies, with the goal of improving water efficiency in landscape irrigation equipment. Beginning July 1, 2026, commercial entities would be prohibited from selling, offering for sale, distributing, or installing new spray sprinkler bodies intended for use in Utah unless they include an integral pressure regulator or otherwise meet the U.S. EPA WaterSense Specification for Spray Sprinkler Bodies, Version 1.0. The bill defines key terms such as “commercial entity,” “landscape area,” and “spray sprinkler body,” and it applies only to new products installed in the state.
The bill also creates several exceptions. It does not apply to certain excluded products, inventory already held by a commercial entity on January 1, 2026, sprinkler bodies installed before July 1, 2026 and later reinstalled in the same landscape area, products manufactured in Utah for out-of-state shipment, wholesale products sold in Utah for final out-of-state use, agricultural land, or uses tied to mining activities regulated under Title 40. These carveouts limit the bill’s reach to ordinary landscape irrigation products used in Utah’s non-agricultural settings.
HB 330 would enact Sections 13-75-101, 13-75-201, and 13-75-301 of the Utah Code, establishing a new regulatory framework for spray sprinkler bodies. It would affect manufacturers, distributors, retailers, and installers of sprinkler equipment by requiring compliance with WaterSense efficiency standards for new in-state products after the effective date. Enforcement authority is assigned exclusively to the attorney general, with no private right of action, and the attorney general may investigate complaints, issue cease-and-desist notices, seek injunctions, and obtain civil fines for reckless or willful violations. Civil penalties collected would go to the General Fund.
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes in the provided materials, the bill appears to be framed as a technical conservation and efficiency measure rather than a controversial policy change. Its structure suggests a regulatory approach focused on water savings and product standards, with delayed implementation and multiple exemptions to ease compliance. No recorded votes or transcript comments are available here to indicate formal support or opposition.
The main points of potential contention are likely to be the mandate itself and the compliance burden on commercial entities that sell or install irrigation equipment. Industry stakeholders could object to the requirement that new products meet WaterSense standards or include integral pressure regulators, especially if it affects inventory, product sourcing, or installation practices. On the other hand, supporters would likely emphasize water conservation and efficiency. The bill’s exemptions for agricultural land, mining uses, existing inventory, and out-of-state manufacturing suggest an effort to narrow the impact and reduce opposition from affected sectors.