The Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments rejected yesterday a proposal to scatter throughout the area the flights and noise from planes using Washington National Airport rather than continue to concentrate them over the Potomac River.

The action by the COG board came after a series of public hearings at which the noise-sharing proposal was generally attacked. It comes at a time of growing belief that noisy jet planes are being routed all over the region anyway, without public consent and despite denials from the Federal Aviation Administration.

FAA officials at National Airport themselves report that telephoned annual noise complaints more than doubled - from 638 to 1,361 - in the 12-month period ending June 30 from the previous 12 months.

And spokespersons from two major tenants of National Airport Eastern Airlines and Allegheny Airlines - confirmed for The Washington Post yesterday what everybody can see: that their jets sometimes fly out of Washington up the Annacostia River instead of up the Potomac.

The Anacostia departure requires plants to make a hard right turn after taking off from the amin south-north National runway so they avoid the Mall and the Capitol, both of which are protected by regulation from overflights.

"I know you've seen some (Anacostia departures)," said National air traffic control chief Harry Hubbard, " but it's not a normal opertion. Sometimes the weather forces us to route takeoffs in that direction; and if a pilot requires a right turn, we'll honor the request . . . The mutual says you can go up the Anacostia."

Hubbard denied again as he has at many public meetings, that the FAA controllers were randomly scattering planes throughout the area to test public response to such an operation.

The Anacostia departure pattern is part of the nose-scattering proposal resulting from a promise by the FAA to work with COG to see if National Airport landing and departure procedures could be changed to reduce the impact of jetliner noise.

The proposal that was taken to public hearings would heve had National flights turn off toward their destinations at a much earlier point after takeoff than they do now and would have had them turn on to final approach at a later point. The reault would have been that some people - particularly those living directly along the Potomac - would get noise relief, but many more would hear and see airplanes.

At six public hearings, citizens testified in the amin that they wanted no part of it. Some, however - those living immediately under present flight patterns - said they would be happy to share the noise. They were in the vast minority, according to a COG report on the hearings.

What the COG board did hyesterday was to incorporate in its resolution many of the suggestions that were heard at the public hearings. By far the single most wanted change would be to shift flights from National to the more bucolic Dulles International or Baltimore-Washington International airports. COG called for an "immediate reduction" in flights to and from National.

Other changes COG proposed to the FAA in its resolution are vigorous enforcement of noise-abatement rules, which are currently voluntary, for airlines using National; a change in flight procedures to reduce power (and noise) over the ares; and a requirement that planes fly higher and farther on takeoff before they turn toward their destinations.

James T. Murphy, director of National and Dulles airports for the FAA, said that a final decision on what to do about the COG resolution would have to be amde by FAA Adminstrator langhorn Bond.

However, he said, a system of sensitive noise monotors will be installed at National "by the end of this year." With such a system he said, " I would expect a higher level of compliance with out noise regulations." Total compliance without mandatory rules, he conceded, "is never obtainable."

In Boston recently, the Massachusetts Port Authority levied fines ranging from $50 to $250 against four airlines for exceeding noise regulations at Logan International Airport.