This inventory includes emissions of coarse particulate matter <10 µm in diameter (PM10), fine particulate matter < 2.5 µm (PM2.5), nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, and ammonia. Emissions are calculated for both Maricopa County and the PM10 nonattaiment area. Annual totals as well as typical daily emissions are provided for all source categories.

The purpose of the ambient air monitoring network is to sample air pollution in a variety of settings, assess the health and welfare effects, and assist in determining sources of air pollution. In general, six basic monitoring objectives and five measuring scales are used to determine the network design. Since it is physically and fiscally impossible to monitor the air in every location, representative samples must be obtained. These samples are determined by using the monitoring objectives and the spatial measurement scales. The network must be dynamic enough to maintain a current representative sample of the air quality. Air quality issues such as eight-hour ozone non-attainment boundaries and permits for new sources are diverse and controversial subjects for the citizens of Maricopa County. With its robust air monitoring network and mobile monitoring tools, the department strives to provide the most reliable and relevant air monitoring data to the public.

This document is designed to improve compliance with Maricopa County air pollution rules and regulations, with particular emphasis on Rule 310, which deals with fugitive dust sources, a major source of PM-10. It also describes control measures and work strategies that will assist in ensuring compliance with Rule 310. Also included in this report is a glossary of terms, a brief summary of applicable County air pollution regulations, and detailed information on the requirements for implementation of dust control practices.

Provides recommendations that improve and enhance the inter-connectivity of trails and transit mobility in the City of Show Low and transit efficiency in the White Mountains, including the communities of Pinetop-Lakeside, Snowflake, Taylor, Holbrook and the White Mountain Apache Tribe. Upon its completion the study was further intended to update the City’s Five Year Transit Plan and the Trails Element of the Show Low General Plan.

In fiscal year 2011, Chino Valley Unified School District’s student achievement was similar to peer district and state averages, and its operational efficiencies were mixed with some costs higher and some costs lower than peer districts’ averages. The District’s per-pupil administrative costs were slightly higher than peer districts’ because the District employed more administrative positions per pupil. The District’s plant operations, food service, and transportation programs operated reasonably efficiently, with cost measures such as cost per square foot, cost per meal, and cost per mile that were similar to or lower than peer districts’ averages. However, the District needs to improve controls over access to critical information systems and strengthen controls over its fuel purchase cards.

In fiscal year 2011, Elfrida Elementary School District’s student AIMS scores for reading and writing were similar to the peer districts’ averages, and its math scores were lower. The District’s operational efficiencies compared favorably to peer district averages in most areas. All of the District’s nonclassroom areas operated with lower per pupil costs than peer districts’ averages and were reasonably efficient overall considering the District’s small size. However, the District’s transportation cost per mile was 59 percent higher than the peer districts’ average, partly because of slightly higher staffing levels. Providing transportation services cooperatively with neighboring districts could help bring costs closer to the peer district average. Further, the District needs to strengthen its accounting and computer controls.

In fiscal year 2011, Pearce Elementary School District’s student AIMS scores were similar to peer districts’ averages. Although per pupil costs were high in some operational areas, the District was reasonably efficient overall. Pearce ESD’s per pupil administration costs were similar to the peer districts’ average, and although its plant operations, food service, and transportation program operated with higher per pupil costs than peer districts, these areas operated in a reasonably efficient manner considering factors such as the age of the District’s buildings, number of meals served, and transportation miles driven. Although relatively efficient, the District should strengthen some of its accounting controls, including ensuring proper separation of duties for its payroll and purchasing processes and ensuring purchases are properly approved before they are made. The District should also strengthen some of its computer controls, such as the requirements for network passwords.

In fiscal year 2011, McNeal Elementary School District’s student AIMS scores were lower than or similar to peer districts’ averages. Although per pupil costs were high in some operational areas, the District was relatively efficient overall. McNeal ESD’s per pupil administrative costs were higher than the peer districts’ average, but only because the District served fewer students. The District’s food service program also had higher per pupil costs, but its cost per meal was similar to the peer districts’ average. However, the District subsidized its food service program with $23,000 that otherwise potentially could have been spent in the classroom. In addition, McNeal ESD’s plant operations and transportation program were both reasonably efficient, with lower costs per square foot and per mile, respectively. McNeal ESD paid a neighboring district to transport high school students living within McNeal ESD’s boundaries. As allowed by law, both districts received full funding for the route miles. Lastly, the District needs to strengthen some of its purchasing and computer controls.

In fiscal year 2011, Kingman Unified School District’s student achievement was similar to peer district averages, and it operated efficiently with lower costs than peer districts’, on average. The District operated its administration with lower per pupil costs because it employed fewer administrative staff per pupil than peer districts, on average. In addition, the District’s plant operations cost per square foot and food service cost per meal were lower than peer districts’ averages. The District’s transportation program cost per pupil was higher than the peer districts’ average, but the program was efficient, with lower per mile costs. However, the District should improve some of its administrative practices. In particular, the District should strengthen controls over its cash handling, culinary arts program, and computer network and systems.