Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 93.djvu/968

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.

PUBLIC LAW 96-000—MMMM. DD, 1979

93 STAT. 936

PUBLIC LAW 96-125—NOV. 26, 1979 Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico, $2,600,000. Homestead Air Force Base, Florida, $9,870,000. Langley Air Force Base, Virginia, $2,500,000. MacDill Air Force Base, Florida, $2,350,000. Moody Air Force Base, Georgia, $1,990,000. Mountain Home Air Force Base, Idaho, $60,000. Myrtle Beach Air Force Base, South Carolina, $970,000. Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, $3,690,000. Seymour Johnson Air Force Base, North Carolina, $2,650,000. Shaw Air Force Base, South Carolina, $2,780,000. AIR NATIONAL GUARD

Buckley Air National Guard Base, Colorado, $1,950,000. OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES AEROSPACE DEFENSE COMMAND

Thule Air Base, Greenland, $3,150,000. AIR FORCE SYSTEMS COMMAND

Mahe Tracking Station, Seychelle Islands, $550,000. Various Locations, $2,350,000. MILITARY AIRLIFT COMMAND

Roberts International Airport, Liberia, $4,950,000. PACIFIC AIR FORCES

Kadena Air Base, Japan, $1,100,000. Kunsan Air Base, Korea, $4,010,000. Osan Air Base, Korea, $20,080,000. Taegu Air Base, Korea, $510,000. TACTICAL AIR COMMAND

Howard Air Force Base, Canal Zone, $4,485,000. UNITED STATES AIR FORCES IN EUROPE

Germany, Various Locations, $13,990,000. United Kingdom, Various Locations, $14,920,000. Various Locations, $10,770,000. EMERGENCY CONSTRUCTION

SEC. 302. The Secretary of the Air Force may establish or develop installations and facilities by proceeding with construction made necessary by changes in missions and responsibilities which have been occasioned by (1) unforeseen security considerations, (2) new weapons development, (3) new and unforeseen research and development requirements, (4) improved production schedules, or (5) revisions in the tasks or functions assigned to a military installation or facility or for environmental considerations, if the Secretary of Defense determines that deferral of such construction for inclusion in the next Military Construction Authorization Act would be inconsistent with interests of national security and, in connection therewith.