Thanks for the response...The laws in Texas state that an engineer can perform geoscience work if it's incidental to engineering work and if the engineer is competent in that area. It also specifically states that you can't seal the work as the work of a geologist if you are not a PG.
I guess I'm just wondering, if there are any more situations, like the one that was mentioned about GPR in Florida, that would specifically call for the hiring of a PG over a PE for a scope of work.
Envirotex thanks for your reply.
I have been doing some research about how difficult is for me (a Civil PE, MS in geotechnical engineering) to sit for the PG exam.
It seems for civils, things are not easy to sit for the PG test. All the state boards require a geology degree, which is the first thing I don;t have. Another is they require about 30 semester hours of 100% geology stuff, which I don;t have either.
I have seen a couple of PE, PGs, which their BS degree is in geology and it seems paperwork for these people in order to become a PE are way easier than the other way around.
Again, I have no geology or "geoscience" degree, BUT, I have a MS in civil - geotechnical engineering. Geotechnical engineering and geology overlap in several topics.
I am not sure if geotechnical engineering is considered a "geoscience" which i doubt, can anyone confirm?
Also not sure either if courses such as soil mechanics, rock mechanics, tunnelling, earth retaining structures are considered "geologic" courses. If they are , things would be a lil bit easier for me, but that's something I am not sure yet.
I know a Civil PE who got his PG license. He got his PG license in the 80s or 70s, where for sure, rules between civil engineers and geologist were more flexible and were completely different to the ones we have today.
Another thing is we are talking a lot about the PG, but before that we need to deal first with the FG (fundamentals of geology) which is something similar to our FE or EIT.