KEN PAXTON August 12, 2022 Ms. Cynthia Trevino Counsel for the City of Uvalde Denton Navarro Rocha Bernal & Zech, PC 25 l 7 North Main Avenue San Antonio, Texas 78212-4685 Dear Ms. Trevino: OR2022-24126 You ask whether certain information is subject to required public disclosure under the Public Information Act (the ··Act"), chapter 552 of the Government Code. Your request was assigned ID# 963676 (ORR Nos. 22-001 through 22-151, 22-154 through 22-158, 22-225, 22-227, 22-230, 22-233, 22-235, and 22-236) The City of Uvalde (the '•city"), which you represent, received 162 requests from 92 requestors for information pertaining to a specified incident. You state the city does not have information responsive to portions of the requests. 1 You claim a portion of the submitted information was not properly requested pursuant to section 1701.661(a) of the Occupations Code. You also claim the submitted information is excepted from disclosure under sections 552.101, 552.103, 552.107, 552.108, 552.117, 552.1175, 552.130, 552.136, and 552. l 52 of the Government Code. 2 We have also received and considered comments from the requestors, representatives of requestors, and interested third parties. See Gov't Code§ 552.304 (permitting interested third party to submit to attorney general reasons why requested inf<Jrmation should or should not be released); see also id. § 552.305; Open 1 The Act does not require a governmental body to release infonnation that did not exist when a request for information \Vas received or to prepare new information in response to a request. See Econ. Opportunities On. Corp. , .. Bostamante, 562 S.W.2d 266, 267-68 (Tex. Civ. App.-San Antonio 1978, writ dism'd); Open Records Decision Nos. 605 at 2 ( 1992), 452 at 3 ( 1986), 362 at 2 ( 1983). ' Although the city raises section 552.1175, we note section 552.117 is the correct exception to raise for information the city holds in its capacity as employer. Post Office Box 125-1-8, ,\ustin, Texas 78711-2548 • (512) 463-2100 • www.tcxasattorneygeneral.gov Ms. Cynthia Trevino - Page 2 Records Decision No. 542 (1990). We have considered the reviewed the submitted representative sample of information. 3 submitted arguments and Initially, we note some of the submitted information, is not responsive to some of the requests at issue because it was created after the date the requests were received. This ruling does not address the public availability of any information that is not responsive to the requests and the city is not required to release such information in response to these requests. Next, we note the requestor in request 22-148 is a Texas State Senator. Section 552.008 of the Government Code grants access to requested information, including confidential information, to individual members, agencies, or committees of the Texas Legislature. Section 552.008 provides: (a) [The Act] does not grant authority to withhold information from individual members, agencies, or committees of the legislature to use for legislative purposes. (b) A governmental body on request by an individual member. agency. or committee of the legislature shall provide public information. including confidential information, to the requesting member, agency, or committee for inspection or duplication in accordance with this chapter if the requesting member, agency, or committee states that the public information is requested under this chapter for legislative purposes. A governmental body. by providing public information under this section that is confidential or otherwise excepted from required disclosure under law, does not waive or affect the confidentiality of the information for purposes of state or federal law or waive the right to assert exceptions to required disclosure of the information in the future. The governmental body may require the requesting individual member of the legislature, the requesting legislative agency or committee, or the members or employees of the requesting entity who will view or handle information that is received under this section and that is confidential under law to sign a confidentiality agreement that covers the information and requires that: (I) the information not be disclosed outside the requesting entity. or within the requesting entity for purposes other than the purpose fi:ir which it was received; (2) the information be labeled as confidential; (3) the information be kept securely; or ·' We assume the "representative sample" of records submitted to this office is truly representative of the requested records as a whole. See Open Records Decision Nos. 499 (1988), 497 (1988). This open records letter does not reach, and therefore does not authorize the withholding of, any other requested records to the extent those records contain substantially different types of information than that submitted to this office. Ms. Cynthia Trevino - Page 3 (4) the number of copies made of the information or the notes taken from the information that implicate the confidential nature of the information be controlled, with all copies or notes that are not destroyed or returned to the governmental body remaining confidential and subject to the confidentiality agreement. ( c) This section does not affect: (I) the right of an individual member, agency, or committee of the legislature to obtain information from a governmental body under other law, including under the rules of either house of the legislature; (2) the procedures under which the information is obtained under other law; or (3) the use that may be made of the information obtained under other law. Gov't Code § 552.00S(a)-(b), (c). In this instance, the requestor is Texas State Senator Roland Gutierrez ("Senator Gutierrez"). However, Senator Gutierrez does not state, and it is not otherwise clear to this office, the request was made for legislative purposes. Accordingly. we must rule on the applicability of section 552.008 in the alternative. If Senator Gutierrez made this request for legislative purposes, then the city must make the information responsive to his request available to him in accordance with section 552.008 of the Government Code. See id. § 552.008(b). We note section 552.008 permits a governmental body to require a member of the legislature to sign a confidentiality agreement for the protection of information obtained pursuant to this section. Id. In addition, release of this information under section 552.008 does not waive or affect the confidentiality of the information for the purposes of state or federal law or waive the right of the department to assert exceptions to required public disclosure of this information to foture requestors. See id. But, if this request for information was not made for legislative purposes, then the information responsive to his request need not be released under section 552.008, and we will consider the submitted arguments against its public disclosure. Next. we note the submitted information contains peace officers' Texas Commission on Law Enforcement ("TCOLE") identification numbers. 4 Section 552.002(a) of the Government Code defines "public information" as information that is written, produced, collected, assembled, or maintained under a law or ordinance or in connection with the transaction of official business: (]) by a governmental body; 1 The Texas Commission on Law Enforcement Officer Standards and Education was renamed the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement by the 83rd Legislature. See Act of May 6, 2013, 83rd Leg., R.S., ch. 93, ~ 1.01. Ms. Cynthia Trevino - Page 4 (2) for a governmental body and the governmental body: (A) owns the information; (B) has a right of access to the information; or (C) spends or contributes public money for the purpose of writing. producing, collecting, assembling, or maintaining the information: or (3) by an individual officer or employee of a governmental body in the officer's or employee's official capacity and the information pertains to official business of the governmental body. Id. § 552.002(a). In Open Records Decision No. 581 ( 1990), this office determined certain computer information, such as source codes, documentation information. and other computer programming, that has no significance other than its use as a tool for the maintenance, manipulation, or protection of public property is not the kind of information made public under section 552.021 of the Government Code. We understand an of1icer·s TCOLE identification number is a unique computer-generated number assigned to peace officers for identification in TCOLE's electronic database, and may be used as an access device number on the TCOLE website. Accordingly, we find the officers· TCOLE identification numbers in the submitted information do not constitute public information under section 552.002 of the Government Code. Therefore. the TCOLE identification numbers are not subject to the Act and need not be released to the requestors. We note we have received comments from interested third parties asserting some of the information at issue was previously released. The Act does not permit selective disclosure of information to the public. See id. §§ 552.007(b), .021; Open Records Decision No. 463 at 1-2 (1987). Information that has been voluntarily released to a member of the public may not subsequently be withheld from another member of the public. unless public disclosure of the information is expressly prohibited by law or the information is confidential under law. See Gov't Code§ 552.007(a); Open Records Decision Nos. 518 at 3 (1989), 490 at 2 (I 988). Although the city seeks to withhold the information at issue under sections 552.103 and 552.108 of the Government Code, these sections are discretionary exceptions to disclosure that protect a governmental body"s interests and may be waived. See Dallas Area Rapid Transit v. Dallas Morning News, 4 S.W.3d 469. 475-76 (Tex. App.-Dallas 1999, no pet.) (governmental body may waive Gov't Code§ 552.103 ); Open Records Decision Nos. 665 at 2 n.5 (2000) (discretionary exceptions generally), 663 at 5 (1999) (waiver of discretionary exceptions), 177 at 3 (I 977) (statutory predecessor to Gov't Code § 552.108 subject to waiver). As such, sections 552.103 and 552.108 do not expressly prohibit the release of information to the public nor do they make information confidential under the Act. Therefore, to the extent the city previously released any of the information at issue to a member of the public voluntarily, it may not now withhold any such information from any of the requestors under section 552.103 or section 552.108 but must, instead, release it. We note portions of the submitted information are subject to section 552.022 of the Ms. Cynthia Trevino - Page 5 Government Code. Section 552.022(a) provides, in relevant part: (a) [T]he following categories of information are public information and not excepted from required disclosure unless made confidential under this chapter or other law: ( 1) a completed report, audit, evaluation, or investigation made ot: for. or by a governmental body, except as provided by Section 552.108; [and] (3) information in an account, voucher, or contract relating to the receipt or expenditure of public or other funds by a governmental body[.] Gov·t Code§ 552.022(a)(l). (3). The information we have indicated consists of completed reports and evaluations subject to section 552.022(a)(l ). The city must release the completed reports and evaluations pursuant to section 552.022(a)(l) unless they are excepted from disclosure under section 552.108 of the Government Code or expressly made confidential under the Act or other law. See id. § 552.022(a)(l). Portions of the submitted information also consist of information in an account or contract relating to the expenditure of funds by a governmental body subject to section 552.022(a)(3). The information subject to section 552.022(a)(3). which we have marked, must be released unless it is made confidential under the Act or other law. See id. § 552.022(a)(3). Although you raise sections 552.103 and 552.108 of the Government Code for the entirety of the submitted information, these sections are discretionary exceptions to disclosure and do not make information confidential under the Act. See Dallas Area Rapid Transit, 4 S.W.3d at 475-76; ORDs 665 at 2 n.5, 663 at 5. Therefore, none of the information subject to section 552.022, which we have marked, may be withheld under section 552.103. Further none of the information subject to section 552.022(a)(3) may be withheld under section 552.108. However, we will consider your arguments for the information not subject to section 552.022. Additionally, you raise sections 552.101. 552.117, and 552.152 for this information. These sections make information confidential under the Act. Accordingly, we will also consider the applicability of these exceptions to the information subject to section 552.022. Section 552.107(1) of the Government Code protects information coming within the attorney-client privilege. When asserting the attorney-client privilege, a governmental body has the burden of providing the necessary facts to demonstrate the elements of the privilege in order to withhold the information at issue. Open Records Decision No. 676 at 6-7 (2002). First, a governmental body must demonstrate that the information constitutes or documents a communication. Id. at 7. Second, the communication must have been made "to facilitate the rendition of professional legal services" to the client governmental body. TEX. R. Ev 10. 503(b )(I). The privilege does not apply when an attorney or representative is involved in some capacity other than that of providing or facilitating professional legal services to the client governmental body. In re Tex. Farmers Ins. Exch., 990 S.W.2d 337, 340 (Tex. App.-Texarkana 1999, orig. proceeding) (attorney-client privilege does not Ms. Cynthia Trevino - Page 6 apply if attorney acting in a capacity other than that of attorney). Governmental attorneys often act in capacities other than that of professional legal counsel. such as administrators. investigators, or managers. Thus, the mere fact that a communication involves an attorney for the government does not demonstrate this element. Third, the privilege applies only to communications between or among clients, client representatives. lawyers, and lawyer representatives. TEX. R. Evm. 503(b)(l). Thus, a governmental body must infrmn this office of the identities and capacities of the individuals to whom each communication at issue has been made. Lastly, the attorney-client privilege applies only to a confidential communication, id., meaning it was "not intended to be disclosed to third persons other than those: (A) to whom disclosure is made to further the rendition of professional legal services to the client; or (B) reasonably necessary to transmit the communication." Id. 503(a)(5). Whether a communication meets this definition depends on the intent of the parties involved at the time the information was communicated. Osborne 1·. Johnson. 954 S.W.2d 180, 184 (Tex. App.-Waco 1997, orig. proceeding). Moreover. because the client may elect to waive the privilege at any time, a governmental body must explain that the confidentiality of a communication has been maintained. Section 552.107(1) generally excepts an entire communication that is demonstrated to be protected by the attorney-client privilege unless otherwise waived by the governmental body. See Huie r. DeShazo. 922 S.W.2d 920, 923 (Tex. 1996) (privilege extends to entire communication. including facts contained therein). You claim Exhibit G30 is protected by section 552.107(1) of the Government Code. You state Exhibit G30 consists of communications between the attorneys for the city and city officials. You state the communications were made for the purpose of facilitating the rendition of professional legal services to the city. You fmther state these communications were intended to be confidential and have remained confidential. Based on your representations and our review, we find you have demonstrated the applicability of the attorney-client privilege to the information at issue. Thus, the city may withhold the Exhibit G30 under section 552.107(1) of the Government Code. 5 Section 552.108(b )(I) of the Government Code excepts from disclosure the internal records and notations of law enforcement agencies and prosecutors when their release would interfere with law enforcement and crime prevention. Gov't Code§ 552.108(b)( I); see also Open Records Decision No. 531 at 2 (1989) (quoting Ex parte Pruill, 551 S.W.2d 706 (Tex. 1977)). A governmental body claiming section 552. I 08(b)(l) must explain how and why the release of the requested information would interfere with law enforcement. See Gov't Code§§ 552.108(b)(l), .30l(e)(l)(A); see also Ex parte Pruitt. 551 S.W.2d 706. Section 552.108(b)(l) is intended to protect "information which. if released. would permit private citizens to anticipate weaknesses in a police depaitment, avoid detection. jeopardize officer safety, and generally undermine police effo1ts to effectuate the laws of this State ... See City of Fort Worth v. Cornyn, 86 S.W.3d 320 at 327 (Tex. App.-Austin 2002, no pet.). This office has concluded section 552.108(b )(I) excepts from public disclosure information relating to the security or operation of a law enforcement agency. See. e.g. Open Records Decision Nos. 531 (release of detailed use of force guidelines would unduly interforc with law enforcement), 252 (1980) (section 552.108 of the Government Code is designed to 5 As our ruling is dispositive, we need not address your remaining arguments against disclosure of this information. Ms. Cynthia Trevino - Page 7 protect investigative techniques and procedures used in law enforcement), 143 (1976) (disclosure of specific operations or specialized equipment directly related to investigation or detection of crime may be excepted). Section 552.108(b )(I) is not applicable, however, to generally known policies and procedures. See, e.g., ORDs 531 at 2-3 (Penal Code provisions, common law rules, and constitutional limitations on use of force not protected), 252 at 3 (governmental body failed to indicate why investigative procedures and techniques requested were any different from those commonly known). You state Exhibits G25 and G28, if released, would interfere with law enforcement or prosecution of crime. We understand the information at issue contains highly specific guidelines for police ofiicers confronted by violence or threatened violence when affecting an arrest or protecting the public safety. You argue release of the information at issue could give criminals a tactical advantage and jeopardize officers' safety. Based on your representations and our review, we agree the release of some of the information at issue, which we have marked, would interfere with law enforcement. Accordingly, the city may withhold the information we have marked under section 552.108(b )(I) of the Government Code. 6 However, we find you have not demonstrated how release of any of the remaining information at issue would interfere with law enforcement or crime prevention. Accordingly, the city may not withhold any of the remaining information at issue under section 552.108(b)(l). Section 552.108(a)( l) of the Government Code excepts from disclosure "[i]nformation held by a law enforcement agency or prosecutor that deals with the detection, investigation, or prosecution of crime [if] release of the information would interfere with the detection, investigation. or prosecution of crime[.]" Gov't Code§ 552.108(a)(l). A governmental body claiming section 552. l 08 must explain how and why the release of the requested information would interfere with law enforcement. See id.§§ 552.108(a)(l), .301 (e)(l )(A); see also }): parte Pru ill, 551 S. W.2d 706 (Tex. 1977). Section 552.108 may be invoked by the proper custodian of information relating to a pending investigation or prosecution of criminal conduct. See Open Records Decision No. 414 at 4-5 (1987). Where a governmental body has custody of information that would otherwise qualify for exception under section 552.108 as information relating to the pending case of a law enforcement agency, the custodian of the records may withhold the information ifit provides this office with a demonstration the information relates to the pending case and a representation from the law enforcement agency that it wishes to have the information withheld. You state, and provide documentation demonstrating, the Texas Department of Public Safety ("DPS") objects to release of the remaining information because it relates to its ongoing criminal investigation. We note the information at issue includes traffic tickets. Because copies of the trat1ic tickets were provided to the individuals who were cited, we find release of the tralrtc tickets will not interfere with the detection, investigation, or prosecution of crime. See Gov't Code§ 552.108(a)(l). We therefore conclude the traffic tickets may not be withheld under section 552. 108(a)(l ). Nevertheless, based on DPS's representation and our review, we conclude the release of some of the information at issue would interfere with the detection, investigation, or prosecution of crime. See Houston Chronicle Pub/ 'g Co. ,,. City o/Houston, 531 S.W.2d 177 (Tex. Civ. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] I 975)(court '' As our ruling is dispositive, we need not address your remaining arguments against disclosure of this information. Ms. Cynthia Trevino - Page 8 delineates law enforcement interests that are present in active cases). writ re(d n.r.e. per curiam, 536 S.W.2d 559 (Tex. 1976). Thus, section 552. 108(a)(I) is applicable to the information we have indicated. However, we find you have not demonstrated how release of any of the remaining information at issue would interfere with law enforcement or crime prevention. Accordingly, the city may not withhold any of the remaining information under section 552.108(a)(l). We note section 552. 108 does not except from disclosure "basic information about an arrested person, an arrest, or a crime." Gov't Code § 552.108( c ). Section 552.108( c) refers to the basic information held to be public in Houston Chronicle. See 531 S. W.2d at 186-88: see also Open Records Decision No. 127 (I 976) (summarizing types of information considered to be basic information). Accordingly, with the exception of basic information. the city may withhold the information we have indicated under section 552.108(a)( I) of the Government Code on behalf ofDPS. 7 As previously noted, section 552.108 is discretionary in nature and does not make information confidential under the Act. See ORDs 665 at 2 n.5, 663 at 5, 177 at 3. Thus, the city has the discretion to release all or part of the information at issue that is not otherwise confidential by law. Gov't Code § 552.007. Section 552.103 of the Government Code provides as follows: (a) Information is excepted from [required public disclosure] if it is information relating to litigation of a civil or criminal nature to which the state or a political subdivision is or may be a party or to which an otlicer or employee of the state or a political subdivision. as a consequence of the person's office or employment, is or may be a party. ( c) Information relating to litigation involving a governmental body or an officer or employee of a governmental body is excepted from disclosure under Subsection (a) only if the litigation is pending or reasonably anticipated on the date that the requestor applies to the officer for public information for access to or duplication of the information. Id.§ 552.103(a), (c). A governmental body has the burden of providing relevant facts and documents to show the section 552.103(a) exception is applicable in a particular situation. The test for meeting this burden is a showing (I) litigation was pending or reasonably anticipated on the date the governmental body received the request for information. and (2) the information at issue is related to that litigation. Univ. of' Tex. Law Sch. v. Tex. Legal Found., 958 S.W.2d 479, 481 (Tex. App.-Austin 1997, orig. proceeding): Heard,·. Houston Post Co., 684 S.W.2d 210, 212 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1984. writ refd n.r.e.); Open Records Decision No. 551 at 4 (1990). A governmental body must meet both prongs of this test for information to be excepted under section 552.103(a). See ORD 551. 7 As our ruling is dispositive, we need not address your remaining arguments against disclosure of this information. Ms. Cynthia Trevino - Page 9 The question of whether litigation is reasonably anticipated must be determined on a case-by-case basis. See Open Records Decision No. 452 at 4 (1986). To establish litigation is reasonably anticipated, the governmental body must furnish concrete evidence that litigation involving a specific matter is realistically contemplated and is more than mere conjecture. Id. Concrete evidence to support a claim that litigation is reasonably anticipated may include, for example, the governmental body's receipt of a letter containing a specific threat to sue the governmental body from an attorney for a potential opposing party. Open Records Decision No. 555 (1990); see Open Records Decision No. 518 at 5 ( 1989) (litigation must be "realistically contemplated"). In addition, this otlice has concluded litigation was reasonably anticipated when the potential opposing party hired an attorney who made a demand for disputed payments and threatened to sue if the payments were not made promptly, or when an individual threatened to sue on several occasions and hired an attorney. See Open Records Decision Nos. 346 (1982), 288 (1981 ). In Open Records Decision No. 638 ( 1996), this office stated a governmental body has met its burden of showing that litigation is reasonably anticipated when it received a notice of claim letter and the governmental body represents that the notice of claim letter is in compliance with the requirements of the Texas Tort Claims Act ('TTCA"), Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code, ch. IO I. On the other hand, this office has determined if an individual publicly threatens to bring suit against a governmental body, but does not actually take objective steps toward filing suit litigation is not reasonably anticipated. See Open Records Decision No. 331 ( 1982). Further. the fact that a potential opposing party has hired an attorney who makes a request for information does not establish litigation is reasonably anticipated. See Open Records Decision No. 361 (1983 ). You assert the remaining information at issue is excepted under section 552.103 of the Government Code. Upon review, however, we find the city has not demonstrated the information at issue is related to pending or reasonably anticipated litigation for purposes of section 552. l 03. Consequently, we conclude the city may not withhold any of the remaining information at issue under section 552.103 of the Government Code. Section 552.102(a) of the Government Code excepts from disclosure "information in a personnel file, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.'' 8 Gov't Code § 552.102(a). The Texas Supreme Court has held section 552.102(a) excepts from disclosure the dates of birth of state employees in the payroll database of the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. Tex. Comptroller of Pub. Accounts v. Al!orney Gen. ofTex., 354 S.W.3d 336 (Tex. 2010). Upon review, we find the city must withhold the dates of birth of current and former employees under section 552. 102(a) of the Government Code. Section 552. l O l of the Government Code excepts from disclosure "information considered to be confidential by law, either constitutional, statutory, or by judicial decision." Gov't Code § 552.10 l. Section 552.101 encompasses the doctrine of common-law privacy, which protects information that is (]) highly intimate or embarrassing, the publication of which would be highly objectionable to a reasonable person, and (2) not of legitimate 8 The Office of the Attorney General wil I raise mandatory exceptions on behalf of a governmental body, but ordinarily will not raise other exceptions. See Open Records Decision Nos. 481 (1987), 480 ( I 987), 470 ( 1987). Ms. Cynthia Trevino - Page I 0 concern to the public. Indus. Found. v. Tex. Indus. Accident Bd., 540 S.W.2d 668. 685 (Tex. I 976). To demonstrate the applicability of common-law privacy, both prongs of this test must be satisfied. Id. at 681-82. Types of information considered intimate and embarrassing by the Texas Supreme Court are delineated in Industrial Foundation. Id at 683. Additionally, this office has concluded some kinds of medical information arc generally highly intimate or embarrassing. See Open Records Decision No. 455 (1987). This office has also found common-law privacy generally protects the identifying information of juvenile offenders. See Open Records Decision No. 394 (1983 ); cf: Fam. Code§ 58.008(b). However, this office has found the public has a legitimate public interest in the details of a crime. See Open Records Decision No. 400 at 4 (1983 ). See generally Lowe v. Hearst Communications, Inc., 487 F.3d 246, 250 (5th Cir. 2007) (noting "legitimate public interest in facts tending to support an allegation of criminal activity"' (citing Cine/ v. Connick, 15 F.3d I 338, 1345-46 (I 994)). The Third Court of Appeals has concluded public citizens' dates of birth are protected by common-law privacy pursuant to section 552.101. Paxton v. City of Dallas, No. 03-13-00546-CV, 2015 WL 3394061. at *3 (Tex. App.-Austin May 22, 2015, pet. denied) (mem. op.). We also note information belonging to an individual who has been de-identified may not be withheld under common-law privacy as the de-identified individual's privacy interests are protected. Upon review, we find some of the information at issue satisfies the standard articulated by the Texas Supreme Court in Industrial Foundation. Accordingly, the city must withhold the dates of birth of identifiable public citizens and the information we have marked under section 552.101 of the Government Code in conjunction with common-law privacy. However, the city has failed to demonstrate any of the remaining information is highly intimate or embarrassing and of no legitimate public interest. Thus, the city may not withhold any of the remaining information under section 552.101 of the Government Code in conjunction with common-law privacy. Section 552.10 I of the Government Code also encompasses the doctrine of constitutional privacy. Constitutional privacy consists of two interrelated types of privacy: (I) the right to make certain kinds of decisions independently and (2) an individual's interest in avoiding disclosure of personal matters. Open Records Decision No. 455 at 4 (1987). The lirst type protects an individual's autonomy within "zones of privacy" which include matters related to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, and child rearing and education. Id. The second type of constitutional privacy requires a balancing between the individual's privacy interests and the public's need to know information of public concern. Id. The scope of information protected is narrower than that under the common law doctrine of privacy; the information must concern the "most intimate aspects of human affairs." Id. at 5 (citing Ramie v. City of Hedwig Village. Texas, 765 F.2d 490 (5th Cir. 1985)). Upon review, we find the city has failed to demonstrate any portion of the remaining information falls within the zones of privacy or implicates an individual's privacy interests for purposes of constitutional privacy. Therefore, the city may not withhold any of remaining information under section 552.10 I on the basis of constitutional privacy. Section 552. l l 7(a)(2) of the Government Code excepts from public disclosure the home address, home telephone number, emergency contact information, and social security number of a current or honorably retired peace officer, as well as information that reveals Ms. Cynthia Trevino - Page 11 whether the current or honorably retired peace officer has family members, regardless of whether the current or honorably retired peace officer complies with sections 552.024 and 552.1175 of the Government Code. See Gov't Code §§ 552. I l 7(a)(2), 552.003( 1-b)) (defining ··honorably retired" for purposes of the Act). We note, for purposes of section 552.117, "family member" means a spouse, minor child, or adult child who resides in the person's home. See id. § 552.l l 7(c) (providing that "family member" has meaning assigned by Fin. Code § 3 l.006(d)). Section 552. I 17(a)(2) applies to peace officers as defined by article 2.12 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Section 552.117 also protects a peace officer's personal cellular telephone number if a governmental body does not pay for the cellular telephone service. See Open Records Decision No. 670 at 6 (2001) (section 552. l l 7(a)(2) excepts from disclosure peace officer's cellular telephone or pager number if officer pays for cellular telephone or pager service). Accordingly, the city must withhold the information we have marked under section 552. l l 7(a)(2) of the Government Code.9 However, the city may not withhold the cellular telephone numbers at issue under section 552. l l 7(a)(2) if a governmental body pays for the cellular telephone service. Section 552. l l 7(a)(l) of the Government Code excepts from disclosure the home address and telephone number, emergency contact information, social security number, and family member information of a current or former employee or official of a governmental body who requests this infonnation be kept confidential under section 552.024 of the Government Code. See Gov't Code § 552. l 17(a)(I ). Section 552.117 is applicable to cellular telephone numbers, provided the cellular telephone service is not paid for by a governmental body. See Open Records Decision No. 506 at 5-6 (1988) (statutory predecessor to section 552.117 not applicable to cellular telephone numbers provided and paid fr)l" by governmental body and intended for official use). Whether a particular item of information is protected by section 552. I 17(a)(l) must be determined at the time of the governmental body's receipt of the request for the information. See Open Records Decision No. 530 at 5 ( 1989). Thus, information may be withheld under section 552. I 17(a)(l) only on behalf of a current or former employee or official who made a request for confidentiality under section 552.024 prior to the date of the governmental body's receipt of the request for the information. Accordingly, if the individuals whose information is at issue timely requested confidentiality pursuant to section 552.024 of the Government Code, the city must withhold the information we have marked under section 552.l l 7(a)(l) of the Government Code; however, the cellular telephone numbers may only be withheld if a governmental body does not pay for the cellular telephone service. Section 552.130 of the Government Code provides information relating to a motor vehicle operator's or driver's license, motor vehicle title or registration, or personal identification document issued by an agency of this state or another state or country is excepted from public release. Gov't Code § 552. 130(a). Upon review, we find the city must withhold the motor vehicle record information we have marked under section 552.130 of the Government Code. Section 552.137 of the Government Code excepts from disclosure "an e-mail address of a member of the public that is provided for the purpose of communicating electronically with 9 As our ruling is dispositive, we need not address your remaining argument against disclosure of this information. Ms. Cynthia Trevino - Page 12 a governmental body," unless the member of the public consents to its release or the e-mail address is of a type specifically excluded by subsection (c ). Id. § 552.137(a)-(c). Section 552.137 does not apply to an institutional e-mail address, the general e-mail address of a business, an e-mail address of a person who has a contractual relationship with a governmental body, an e-mail address of a vendor who seeks to contract with a governmental body, an e-mail address maintained by a governmental entity for one of its officials or employees, or an e-mail address provided to a governmental body on a letterhead. See id. § 552.137(c). We are unable to determine whether some of the personal e-mail addresses at issue, which are located within e-mails communicating otlicial business of the city, belong to city officials or employees. Thus, we rule conditionally. To the extent the e-mail addresses within the remaining information are the personal e-mail addresses of city employees, or to the extent subsection (c) applies, this information is not subject to section 552.137 of the Government Code and may not be withheld on that basis. See Austin Bulldog v. L~ffingwe/1, 490 S.W.3d 240 (Tex. App.-Austin 2016, no pet.) (holding personal e-mail addresses of government officials used to conduct official government business are not e-mail addresses of"members of the public'· for purposes ofGov't Code § 552.137(a)). However, to the extent the e-mail addresses within the remaining information are not the personal e-mail addresses of city employees and subsection (c) does not apply, this information is subject to section 552.13 7 and must be withheld under section 552.137 of the Government Code, unless the owners of the e-mail addresses altirmatively consent to their release. The city seeks to withhold the identifying information of police officers and city employees under section 552.152 of the Government Code. Section 552.152 provides. Information in the custody of a governmental body that relates to an employee or officer of the governmental body is excepted from !required public disclosure] if: under the specific circumstances pertaining to the employee or officer, disclosure of the information would subject the employee or officer to a substantial threat of physical harm. Gov'! Code § 552.152. The city argues the release of some of the remaining information would subject the officers and employees to a substantial threat of physical harm. Upon review, we find you have failed to demonstrate release of any of the remaining information would subject an employee or officer to a substantial risk of physical harm. Therefore, the city may not withhold any of the remaining information under section 552.152 of the Government Code. In summary, the TCOLE identification numbers are not subject to the Act and need not be released to the requestors. The city may withhold the Exhibit G30 under section 552.107( 1) of the Government Code. The city may withhold the information we have marked under section 552.I0S(b)(l) of the Government Code. With the exception of basic information. the city may withhold the information we have indicated under section 552.I0&(a)(l) of the Government Code on behalf of DPS. The city must withhold the dates of birth of current and former employees under section 552.102(a) of the Government Code. The city must withhold the dates of birth of identifiable public citizens and the information we have marked under section 552.101 of the Government Code in conjunction with common-law privacy. To the extent the cellular telephone numbers at issue are not paid for by a Ms. Cynthia Trevino - Page 13 governmental body, the city must withhold the infonnation we have marked under section 552. l I 7(a)(2) of the Government Code. If the individuals whose information is at issue timely requested confidentiality pursuant to section 552.024 of the Government Code, the city must withhold the information we have