POPLAR, Mont. -- After more than a decade of peaceful coexistence, the Fort Peck Assiniboine and Sioux Tribal Nation is once again seeking to derail the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (NYSE: BNI - news).

At stake is the tribes' authority to tax the railroad for use of reservation lands.

In a brief filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals, the tribes asked for the Ninth Circuit to again intervene in the dispute that began in 1987 when the tribes adopted a law imposing a tax on companies using reservation lands. Burlington Northern brought suit challenging the tribes' authority to take this action. That case was decided by the court of appeals in March 1991 in favor of Fort Peck.

"We thought that was the end of it," said Tribal Chairman Arlyn Headdress. "Apparently, so did the railroad because they began paying the taxes they owed. Then last year they suddenly stopped. We had no alternative but to once again take legal action."

On Feb. 1, the tribes filed suit against Burlington Northern in Fort Peck Tribal Court. Three weeks later, the railroad filed a separate suit in U.S. District Court for the District of Montana in which it again challenged the tribes' authority to collect the tax. Without hearing oral arguments, the district court on June 13 ruled in favor of the railroad.

In its appeal, the tribes point to what they call several significant errors in the district court's ruling.

"Burlington raises the very same issue that it lost on in 1991 and under federal law cannot seek to re-litigate this issue," said Headdress.

"When congress created the reservation and granted the railroad right of way in the 1880's, it intended for the tribes to exercise taxing authority over the railroad. Congress and the executive branch have encouraged tribes to govern their own reservations and become economically self-sufficient. An important part of that process involves our right to assess reasonable taxes on non-Indian businesses operating within the boundaries of our reservation."

The brief points to continuous consensual relationships that have existed between the tribes and railroad for more than 114 years, which the Supreme Court has held, justify tribal taxes.

Headdress also questioned the authority of the district court to have heard Burlington's case.

"We filed our suit in Tribal Court because the courts have held that issues concerning Native Americans that occur on tribal land should first be heard in Tribal Court," he said. "By ruling on the railroad's suit, the district court prohibited this from happening."

Noting that 11 tribal members were killed and three seriously injured on the reservation since 1987, Headdress said a big factor involves "very real safety concerns" for the 8,000 Indians who live on the reservation.

He said more than 600,000 freight cars a year cross tribal lands. "Many of them carry hazardous and toxic cargo that could spill in a derailment like the one that happened in the Baltimore tunnel this summer. That would threaten the lives of the entire tribal community."

To be prepared in the event of an accident or fire, the tribes must undertake emergency planning and provide law enforcement, emergency medical and fire fighting services, Headdress added.

"Clearly, the impact of the railroad's operations on the health, safety and welfare of our people and the natural resources of our reservation more than justifies the tribes' tax," he said.

Burlington Northern has until October to file a brief in response to the tribes' action. The tribes then have 14 days from the date of Burlington's response to file a reply.

Tribal attorney Reid Peyton Chambers of the Washington, D.C. law firm Sonosky, Chambers, Sachse, Endreson & Perry said he expects the court will hear oral arguments, but no date has yet been set.