(1) (a) (I) In any action, suit, or proceeding in which the parentage of a child is at issue, including but not limited to actions or proceedings pursuant to section 14-10-122 (6) or 19-4-107.3, C.R.S., upon motion of the court or any of the interested parties, the court shall order the alleged mother, the child or children, and the alleged father to submit to genetic testing and other appropriate testing of inherited characteristics, including but not limited to blood and tissue type, for the purpose of determining probability of parentage. If a party refuses to submit to these tests, the court may resolve the question of parentage against the party to enforce its order if the rights of others and the interests of justice so require.
(II) A court, pursuant to this section, or delegate child support enforcement unit pursuant to section 26-13.5-105, C.R.S., shall not order genetic testing of a child whose parentage has previously been determined by or pursuant to the law of another state, but a court may stay a support proceeding for such reasonable time as determined by the court to allow the party asserting the defense to pursue the nonparentage claim in the other state.
(b) The tests shall be conducted by a laboratory approved by an accreditation body designated by the secretary of the federal department of health and human services, utilizing any genetic test of a type generally acknowledged as reliable by such accreditation body. Costs of any such expert witness for the first test administered shall be fixed at a reasonable amount and shall be paid as the court orders. If the results of the tests or the expert analysis of inherited characteristics are disputed by any party, the court shall order that an additional test be made by the same or another laboratory at the expense of the party disputing the test results or analysis.
(c) Documentation from the testing laboratory of the following information is sufficient to establish a reliable chain of custody that makes the results of genetic testing admissible without testimony:
(I) The names and photographs of the individuals from whom specimens have been taken;
(II) The names of the individuals who collected the specimens;
(III) The places at which and dates on which the specimens were collected;
(IV) The names of the individuals who received the specimens in the testing laboratory; and
(V) The dates the specimens were received.
(d) A specimen used in genetic testing may consist of one or more samples or a combination of samples, of blood, buccal cells, bone, hair, or other body tissue or fluid. The specimen used in the testing need not be of the same kind for each individual undergoing genetic testing.
(e) Specimens and reports are confidential. An individual who intentionally releases an identifiable specimen of another individual for any purpose other than that relevant to the proceeding regarding parentage without a court order or the written permission of the individual who furnished the specimen commits a class 2 misdemeanor and, upon conviction, shall be punished as provided in section 18-1.3-501 (1).
(f) A report of genetic testing must be in a record, defined in section 19-1-103, and signed under penalty of perjury by a designee of the testing laboratory. A report made pursuant to the requirements of this article 25 is self-authenticating.
(g) Under this section, a man is presumed to be the father of a child if the genetic testing complies with the requirements of this section and the results disclose that the man is not excluded and that the man has at least a ninety-seven percent probability of paternity.
(h) A man presumed to be the father of the child pursuant to paragraph (g) of this subsection (1) may rebut the genetic testing results only by other genetic testing that satisfies the requirements of this section and that:
(I) Excludes the man as the genetic father of the child; or
(II) Identifies another man as the father of the child.
(i) The presumption of parentage of a child born during a marriage may be overcome, as provided in section 19-4-105 (2)(a), if the court finds that the conclusion of the experts conducting the tests, as disclosed by the evidence based upon the tests, shows that one of the spouses is not the parent of the child.
(2) Any objection to genetic testing results shall be made in writing not less than fifteen days before the first scheduled hearing at which the results may be introduced into evidence or fifteen days after motion for summary judgment is served on such person; except that a person shall object to the genetic testing results not less than twenty-four hours prior to the first scheduled hearing if such person did not receive the results fifteen or more days before such hearing. The test results shall be admissible as evidence of paternity in an action filed pursuant to article 10 of title 14, C.R.S., article 4 of title 19, C.R.S., or article 13.5 of title 26, C.R.S., without the need for foundation testimony or other proof of authenticity or accuracy.
(3) For good cause shown, the court may order genetic testing of a deceased individual.
(4) The court may order genetic testing of a brother of a man presumed to be the father of a child if the man is commonly believed to have an identical brother and evidence suggests that the brother may be the genetic father of the child. If genetic testing excludes none of the brothers as the genetic father, and each brother satisfies the requirements as the presumed father of the child under section 19-4-105, C.R.S., without consideration of another identical brother being presumed to be the father of the child, the court may rely on nongenetic evidence to adjudicate which brother is the father of the child.
Source: L. 57: p. 366, � 1. CRS 53: � 52-1-27. C.R.S. 1963: � 52-1-27. L. 67: p. 262, � 46. L. 77: (1)(a) amended, p. 1018, � 2, effective July 1. L. 78: (1)(a), (1)(c)(I), (1)(c)(III), and (1)(c)(IV) amended, p. 262, � 46, effective May 23. L. 83: Entire section R&RE, p. 627, � 1, effective May 26. L. 91: Entire section amended, p. 247, � 1, effective July 1. L. 94: (2) added, p. 1535, � 1, effective July 1. L. 97: (1)(b) and (2) amended, p. 1263, � 4, effective July 1. L. 2003: Entire section amended, p. 1238, � 1, effective July 1. L. 2008: (1)(a) amended, p. 1657, � 4, effective August 15. L. 2011: (1)(a) amended, (SB 11-123), ch. 46, p. 118, � 1, effective August 10. L. 2018: (1)(i) amended, (SB 18-095), ch. 96, p. 753, � 4, effective August 8. L. 2021: (1)(f) amended, (SB 21-059), ch. 136, p. 711, � 16, effective October 1; (1)(e) amended, (SB 21-271), ch. 462, p. 3158, � 156, effective March 1, 2022.
Cross references: (1) For parentage proceedings, see article 4 of title 19.
(2) For the legislative declaration contained in the 1997 act amending subsections (1)(b) and (2), see section 1 of chapter 236, Session Laws of Colorado 1997. For the legislative declaration in SB 18-095, see section 1 of chapter 96, Session Laws of Colorado 2018.
13-25-126.5. Documents arising from environmental self-evaluation - admissibility in evidence. (1) The general assembly hereby finds and declares that protection of the environment is enhanced by the public's voluntary compliance with environmental laws and that the public will benefit from incentives to identify and remedy environmental compliance issues. It is further declared that limited expansion of the protection against disclosure will encourage such voluntary compliance and improve environmental quality and that the voluntary provisions of this act will not inhibit the exercise of the regulatory authority by those entrusted with protecting our environment.
(2) For the purposes of this section, unless the context otherwise requires:
(a) Administrative law judge means any person appointed to be an administrative law judge pursuant to part 10 of article 30 of title 24, C.R.S.
(b) Environmental audit report means any document, including any report, finding, communication, or opinion or any draft of a report, finding, communication, or opinion, related to and prepared as a result of a voluntary self-evaluation that is done in good faith.
(c) Environmental law means any requirement contained in article 20.5 of title 8, C.R.S., articles 7, 8, 11, and 15 of title 25, C.R.S., or article 20 of title 30, C.R.S., in regulations promulgated under such provisions, or in any orders, permits, licenses, or closure plans under such provisions.
(d) In camera review means a hearing or review in a courtroom, hearing room, or chambers to which the general public is not admitted. After such hearing or review, the content of the oral and other evidence and statements of the judge and counsel shall be held in confidence by those participating in or present at the hearing or review, and any transcript of the hearing or review shall be sealed and not considered a public record, until and unless its contents are disclosed by a court or administrative law judge having jurisdiction over the matter.
(e) Voluntary self-evaluation means a self-initiated assessment, audit, or review, not otherwise expressly required by environmental law, that is performed by any person or entity, for itself, either by an employee or employees employed by such person or entity who are assigned the responsibility of performing such assessment, audit, or review or by a consultant engaged by such person or entity expressly and specifically for the purpose of performing such assessment, audit, or review to determine whether such person or entity is in compliance with environmental laws. Once initiated, such voluntary self-evaluation shall be completed within a reasonable period of time. Nothing in this section shall be construed to authorize uninterrupted voluntary self-evaluations.
(3) An environmental audit report is privileged and is not admissible in any legal action or administrative proceeding and is not subject to any discovery pursuant to the rules of civil procedure, criminal procedure, or administrative procedure, unless:
(a) The entity or person for whom the environmental audit report was prepared, whether the environmental audit report was prepared by the entity or by a consultant hired by the entity, waives the privilege under this section;
(b) (I) A court of record, or, pursuant to section 24-4-105, C.R.S., an administrative law judge, after an in camera review, determines that:
(A) The environmental audit report shows evidence that the person or entity for which the environmental audit report was prepared is not or was not in compliance with an environmental law; and
(B) The person or entity did not initiate appropriate efforts to achieve compliance with the environmental law or complete any necessary permit application promptly after the noncompliance with the environmental law was discovered and, as a result, the person or entity did not or will not achieve compliance with the environmental law or complete the necessary permit application within a reasonable amount of time.
(II) For the purposes of this paragraph (b) only, if the evidence shows noncompliance by a person or entity with more than one environmental law, the person or entity may demonstrate that appropriate efforts to achieve compliance were or are being taken by instituting a comprehensive program that establishes a phased schedule of actions to be taken to bring the person or entity into compliance with all of such environmental laws.
(c) A court of record, or, pursuant to section 24-4-105, C.R.S., an administrative law judge, after an in camera review, determines that compelling circumstances exist that make it necessary to admit the environmental audit report into evidence or that make it necessary to subject the environmental audit report to discovery procedures;
(d) A court of record, or, pursuant to section 24-4-105, C.R.S., an administrative law judge, after an in camera review, determines that the privilege is being asserted for a fraudulent purpose or that the environmental audit report was prepared to avoid disclosure of information in an investigative, administrative, or judicial proceeding that was underway, that was imminent, or for which the entity or person had been provided written notification that an investigation into a specific violation had been initiated; or
(e) A court of record, or, pursuant to section 24-4-105, C.R.S., an administrative law judge, after an in camera review, determines that the information contained in the environmental audit report demonstrates a clear, present, and impending danger to the public health or the environment in areas outside of the facility property.
(4) The self-evaluation privilege created by this section does not apply to:
(a) Documents or information required to be developed, maintained, or reported pursuant to any environmental law or any other law or regulation;
(b) Documents or other information required to be available or furnished to a regulatory agency pursuant to any environmental law or any other law or regulation;
(c) Information obtained by a regulatory agency through observation, sampling, or monitoring;
(d) Information obtained through any source independent of the environmental audit report or any person covered under section 13-90-107 (1)(j)(I)(A);
(e) Documents existing prior to the commencement of and independent of the voluntary self-evaluation;
(f) Documents prepared subsequent to the completion of and independent of the voluntary self-evaluation; or
(g) Any information, not otherwise privileged, including the privilege created by this section, that is developed or maintained in the course of regularly conducted business activity or regular practice.
(5) (a) Upon a showing by any party, based upon independent knowledge, that probable cause exists to believe that an exception to the self-evaluation privilege under subsection (3) of this section is applicable to an environmental audit report or that the privilege does not apply to the environmental audit report pursuant to the provisions of subsection (4) of this section, then a court of record or, pursuant to section 24-4-105, C.R.S., any administrative law judge, may allow such party limited access to the environmental audit report for the purposes of an in camera review only. The court of record or the administrative law judge may grant such limited access to all or part of the environmental audit report under the provisions of this subsection (5) upon such conditions as may be necessary to protect the confidentiality of the environmental audit report. A moving party who obtains access to an environmental audit report pursuant to the provisions of this subsection (5) may not divulge any information from the report except as specifically allowed by the court or administrative law judge.
(b) (I) If any party divulges all or any part of the information contained in an environmental audit report in violation of the provisions of paragraph (a) of this subsection (5) or if any other person or entity knowingly divulges or disseminates all or any part of the information contained in an environmental audit report that was provided to such person or entity in violation of the provisions of paragraph (a) of this subsection (5), such party or other person or entity is liable for any damages caused by the divulgence or dissemination of the information that are incurred by the person or entity for which the environmental audit report was prepared.
(II) If any public entity, public employee, or public official divulges all or any part of the information contained in an environmental audit report in violation of the provisions of subsection (5)(a) of this section or knowingly divulges or disseminates all or any part of the information contained in an environmental audit report that was provided to such public entity, public employee, or public official in violation of the provisions of subsection (5)(a) of this section, such public entity, public employee, or public official commits a class 2 misdemeanor, may be found in contempt of court by a court of record, and may be assessed a penalty not to exceed ten thousand dollars by a court of record or an administrative law judge.
(6) Nothing in this section limits, waives, or abrogates the scope or nature of any statutory or common-law privilege.
(7) A person or entity asserting a voluntary self-evaluation privilege has the burden of proving a prima facie case as to the privilege. A party seeking disclosure of an environmental audit report has the burden of proving that such privilege does not exist under this section.
(8) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (3) of this section, the existence of an environmental audit report shall be subject to discovery proceedings pursuant to the rules of civil procedure, criminal procedure, or administrative procedure; except that the contents of such a report or any other privileged information contained therein shall remain confidential.
(9) This section applies to voluntary self-evaluations that are performed on or after June 1, 1994.
Source: L. 94: Entire section added, p. 1865, � 1, effective June 1. L. 96: (2)(c) amended, p. 1469, � 11, effective June 1. L. 99: (9) amended, p. 301, � 1, effective April 14. L. 2021: (5)(b)(II) amended, (SB 21-271), ch. 462, p. 3158, � 157, effective March 1, 2022.