United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS January 31, 2005 FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk

No. 02-60288

DAVIS MOUNTAINS TRANS-PECOS HERITAGE ASSOCIATION, a Texas non-profit corporation,

Petitioner,

versus

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION; MARION C. BLAKEY, Administrator, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION; NORMAN Y. MINETA, SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION,

Respondents.

________________________________________

No. 03-10506

DAVIS MOUNTAINS TRANS-PECOS HERITAGE ASSOCIATION; DALE TOONE; SUSAN TOONE; TIM LEARY; REXANN LEARY; EARL BAKER; SYLVIA BAKER; MARK DAUGHERTY; ANN DAUGHERTY; DICK R. HOLLAND; J. P. BRYAN; JACKSON BEN LOVE, JR.; KAARE J. REEME,

Plaintiffs-Appellants, versus

UNITED STATES AIR FORCE; JAMES G. ROCHE; Secretary United States Sir Force; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE; DONALD H. RUMSFIELD, Secretary of Defense,

Defendants-Appellees.

________________________________________

No. 03-10528

BUSTER WELCH; JOHN F. OUDT; LESA OUDT; JOHN DIRK OUDT; CINDY ANN SPIRES, ET AL,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

versus

UNITED STATES AIR FORCE; F. WHITTEN PETERS, Secretary of the United States Air Force; WENDELL L. GRIFFIN, Colonel, Commander, 7th Bomb Wing, Dyess Holloman Air Force Base; CURTIS M. BEDKE, Brigadier General, Commander, 2nd Bomb Wing, Barksdale Air Force Base; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE; DONALD H. RUMSFIELD, SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE,

Defendants-Appellees.

Petitions for Review of an Order

2 of the Federal Aviation Administration _______________________________________________________

ON PETITIONS FOR REHEARING

Before REAVLEY, JONES and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The petition for rehearing of The Air force is granted to this extent: The

operation of the Realistic Bomber Training Initiative may continue pending outcome

of the supplemental environmental impact statement under conditions of operation

set by the district court. The case is remanded to that court for that purpose.

The petitions for rehearing are otherwise denied.

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. 3