the Anglo-French plane.  Any uncertainty that might have remained after Coleman's decision was dissipated by the Secretary the following week, when he told the House Committee on Public Works and Transportation that an airport proprietor's imposition of a "non-discriminatory" ban on supersonic transports would not be preempted by FAA action, as long as it did not constitute an "unreasonable burden on interstate and foreign commerce."  Aircraft Noise Policy Hearings, 94th Cong. 2d Sess., at 705 (1975-76).  Secretary Coleman reiterated the vitality of this "federal policy" again two weeks after the Port Authority promulgated its "temporary" ban on the Concorde.  It is now evident that this approach to noise regulation has survived the change of administration.  President Carter and his present Transportation Secretary BrockU.S. 349, 71 S.Ct. 295, 95 L.Ed. 329 (1951).  The law seems clear that any Port Authority regulation pertaining to the Concorde must reasonably and nondiscriminatorily advance the end of aircraft noise abatement for airport neighbors


4
 The amicus brief of the United States did not address the effect of existing treaty obligations on this case because, as the government stated, there were pending discussions concerning renewal of the bilateral aviation compact between the United States and the United Kingdom.  It has been reported that the controversy over the Concorde has contributed significantly to the difficulties encountered in renegotiating the Bermuda Agreement


