When state employees who live in Pierre have to fly somewhere on official state business, can they be reimbursed for the mileage from their home to the Pierre airport?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1975. Ask about yours and see what current South Dakota law means for your facts, with citations you can check.
Plain-English summary
State Auditor Alice Kundert asked AG William Janklow whether state employees who live in Pierre (the state capital and the post of duty for most state employees) should be reimbursed for trips to the Pierre Municipal Airport when their state work required them to fly elsewhere.
The applicable rule was 51:01:02:01 of the State Board of Finance, which said state employees would be paid 14 cents per mile for use of personal automobiles when "engaged in official business outside city limits of their designated posts of duty or place of service." The rule clearly excluded reimbursement for travel inside the city limits of the duty station.
Pierre Municipal Airport sat just outside the Pierre city limits, only a few hundred yards beyond the city boundary. So an employee driving from a Pierre home to the airport spent most of the trip inside the city limits (no reimbursement) and the last few hundred yards outside the city limits (potentially reimbursable). The Travel Commission's approval was required for the reimbursable portion, under rule 5:01:03:07.
Janklow answered that an employee could be reimbursed for the portion outside the city limits if the claim had Travel Commission approval. He also observed that processing vouchers for a few cents wasted state resources.
The bottom line: the portion inside Pierre city limits was excluded, while the portion outside city limits could be reimbursed with the required approval. The opinion did not give the State Auditor authority to reject an otherwise eligible claim because of its small amount.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 1975. Subsequent rule changes, statutory amendments, or later policy decisions may have updated state employee travel reimbursement. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here. The 14 cents per mile rate reflects 1975 policy and is not a current rate. The State Board of Finance and Travel Commission rule structures may also have been reorganized. Modern questions about state employee travel reimbursement should be verified against current administrative rules and Department of Administration policies.
What the opinion meant at the time
For Pierre-resident state employees, only the few hundred yards outside city limits could be reimbursed, and the claim had to include Travel Commission approval.
For the State Auditor's office, the AG noted the cost of processing a voucher for a few cents but did not say the office could decline a qualifying claim.
For state agency travel administrators, the opinion called for separating the inside-city and outside-city portions and checking for Travel Commission approval of a reimbursement claim.
For state employees living outside Pierre who came to the Pierre airport to fly elsewhere, the opinion did not address their situation. It spoke only to Pierre-resident employees whose post of duty was Pierre.
Common questions
Q: What is a "designated post of duty"?
A: The opinion did not define the term. It applied the rule's exclusion of travel within the city limits of the employee's designated post of duty or place of service to Pierre-resident employees' airport trips.
Q: Why are commuting expenses not reimbursable?
A: The opinion did not discuss commuting expenses generally. It relied on a rule that paid mileage for private-car use on official business outside the city limits of the employee's designated post of duty or place of service.
Q: What does the Travel Commission do?
A: The opinion required Travel Commission approval to accompany a claim for the reimbursable portion of the Pierre airport trip. It did not describe the commission's broader functions.
Q: Could the employee claim parking or other airport-related expenses?
A: The opinion only addressed mileage. Airport parking and other ancillary expenses would be analyzed under their own travel rules, which the opinion did not reach.
Background and statutory framework
The opinion applied a State Board of Finance mileage rule and a State Board of Travel rule requiring Travel Commission approval for this claim.
Rule 51:01:02:01 paid mileage for official business outside the city limits of a designated post of duty or place of service. The AG read it to prohibit reimbursement for the part of this trip within Pierre city limits.
The airport terminal was a few hundred yards beyond Pierre city limits. Janklow allowed reimbursement only for the outside-city portion with Travel Commission approval. He observed that "as a practical matter, it is a waste of the state's resources to process vouchers for a few cents."
Citations and references
Administrative rules:
- Rule 51:01:02:01 of the State Board of Finance (mileage reimbursement; excludes within post-of-duty city limits)
- Rule 5:01:03:07 of the State Board of Travel (Travel Commission approval requirement)
Source
Original opinion text
April 10, 1975
Miss Alice Kundert
State Auditor
State Capitol
Pierre, South Dakota 57501
OFFICIAL OPINION NO. 75-67
Trips to Pierre Airport
Dear Miss Kundert:
You have asked whether state employees who reside in the capitol city of Pierre should be reimbursed for trips to the Pierre airport when their duties require them to use air transportation to other locations.
Rule 51:01:02:01 of the State Board of Finance provides in part:
Employees shall be paid in lieu of actual expenses of transportation, fourteen cents per mile for use of privately owned automobiles when engaged in official business outside city limits of their designated posts of duty or place of service.
This provision clearly prohibits reimbursement for travel within the city limits of the employee's duty station. Although the Pierre Municipal Airport terminal is not within the Pierre city limits, it is within a few hundred yards of the city limits. Arguably, a claimant could be reimbursed for those few hundred yards of travel if the claimant has secured Travel Commission approval pursuant to rule 5:01:03:07. However, as a practical matter, it is a waste of the state's resources to process vouchers for a few cents. Therefore, it is my opinion that state employees who reside in Pierre may only be reimbursed for the portion of their trip to the Pierre airport which is outside the city limits of Pierre. Furthermore, the claim must be accompanied by Travel Commission approval as required by rule 5:01:03:07 of the state Board of Travel.
Respectfully submitted,
WILLIAM J. JANKLOW
ATTORNEY GENERAL
WJJ:MAG:dh
What does South Dakota law say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 1975. Ezel checks the current South Dakota statutes and case law, applies them to your situation, and cites what it relies on.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace