The Clean Air Act states that an area can be redesignated to attainment if specific conditions are met, such as attainment of federal air quality standards; approval of a state implementation plan and a maintenance plan; and permanent and enforceable improvements in air quality. This document demonstrates that all CAA requirements for attainment have been met, summarizes the progress of the area in attaining the PM10 standards, demonstrates that the Payson area qualifies for EPA’s Clean Data Policy and Limited Maintenance Plan option, and includes a maintenance plan to assure continued attainment for ten years after the redesignation. This document is a formal request to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to redesignate the Payson, Arizona PM10 nonattainment area to attainment of the health-based 24-hour average and annual average PM10 National Ambient Air Quality Standards.

Analyses included in this document show that ambient air quality measurements have remained below the NAAQS for PM10, and both the 24-hour average design value and annual average PM10 design value are below EPA allowable limits. This document also demonstrates that the emission reduction control measures responsible for the air quality improvement are both permanent and enforceable.

In fiscal year 2012, Payson Unified School District’s student achievement was slightly higher than peer district averages, and the District’s operations were reasonably efficient in most areas. The District’s administrative costs were similar to the peer district average, but the District lacked adequate controls over user access to its computer network and systems. The District’s plant operations cost per square foot was similar to the peer districts’ average, but its cost per pupil was higher because it operated more building space per pupil. The District’s transportation program costs were higher than peer district averages, but the program was reasonably efficient, with efficient bus routes and proper fuel usage monitoring. However, the District’s food service program was less than efficient, with a higher cost per meal than the peer districts’ average because of higher staffing costs and some food service vendor contract terms that were not favorable to the District. As a result, the District spent $24,590 of its Maintenance and Operation Fund monies to subsidize its food service program.