OPINION OF THE COURT
PER CURIAM:
In this appeal, we are presented with the question of whether the Delaware noise control statute and its regulations, as applied to activities at an interstate railroad facility, are preempted by the Federal Noise Control Act of 1972, even though the federal agency had not promulgated regulations to control noise emissions from rail-yard property lines, which included refrigerated rail cars and refrigerated trailers and containers (trailer on flat car/containers on flat car — TOFC/COFC). 7 Del.C. § 7101 et seq:; Noise Control Act of 1972, § 17, 42 U.S.C. § 4916.
We hold that the application of the Delaware noise control statute to the interstate railroad facility in issue is preempted by the federal noise control statute for the reasons noted in Judge Stapleton’s opinion. Baltimore and Ohio R. Co. v. Oberly, 606 F.Supp. 1340 (D.Del.1985). In addition, we note that, at our request, the General Counsel of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) filed a memorandum of law addressing the EPA’s views as to whether the Delaware statute is preempted. The EPA also agreed that section 17 of the Noise Control Act preempts the Delaware standard where EPA has adopted federal standards regulating noise from railroad facilities and, further, has considered and then declined to prescribe a federal property line standard for railroad facilities on the ground that it is unnecessary.
Accordingly, the judgment of the district court will be affirmed.
What follows is an opinion from a United States Court of Appeals.
Intervenors who participated as parties at the courts of appeals should be counted as either appellants or respondents when it can be determined whose position they supported. For example, if there were two plaintiffs who lost in district court, appealed, and were joined by four intervenors who also asked the court of appeals to reverse the district court, the number of appellants should be coded as six.
In some cases there is some confusion over who should be listed as the appellant and who as the respondent. This confusion is primarily the result of the presence of multiple docket numbers consolidated into a single appeal that is disposed of by a single opinion. Most frequently, this occurs when there are cross appeals and/or when one litigant sued (or was sued by) multiple litigants that were originally filed in district court as separate actions. The coding rule followed in such cases should be to go strictly by the designation provided in the title of the case. The first person listed in the title as the appellant should be coded as the appellant even if they subsequently appeared in a second docket number as the respondent and regardless of who was characterized as the appellant in the opinion.
To clarify the coding conventions, consider the following hypothetical case in which the US Justice Department sues a labor union to strike down a racially discriminatory seniority system and the corporation (siding with the position of its union) simultaneously sues the government to get an injunction to block enforcement of the relevant civil rights law. From a district court decision that consolidated the two suits and declared the seniority system illegal but refused to impose financial penalties on the union, the corporation appeals and the government and union file cross appeals from the decision in the suit brought by the government. Assume the case was listed in the Federal Reporter as follows:
United States of America,
Plaintiff, Appellant
v
International Brotherhood of Widget Workers,AFL-CIO
Defendant, Appellee.
International Brotherhood of Widget Workers,AFL-CIO
Defendants, Cross-appellants
v
United States of America.
Widgets, Inc. & Susan Kuersten Sheehan, President & Chairman
of the Board
Plaintiff, Appellants,
v
United States of America,
Defendant, Appellee.
This case should be coded as follows:Appellant = United States, Respondents = International Brotherhood of Widget Workers Widgets, Inc., Total number of appellants = 1, Number of appellants that fall into the category "the federal government, its agencies, and officials" = 1, Total number of respondents = 3, Number of respondents that fall into the category "private business and its executives" = 2, Number of respondents that fall into the category "groups and associations" = 1.
Your task is to identify the state of the first listed state or local government agency that is an appellant.