Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!ingr!b11!goodloe
From: goodloe@b11.ingr.com (Tony Goodloe)
Newsgroups: comp.org.ieee
Subject: Re: PE exam, EIT exam  (was: The Title of Engineer)
Message-ID: <5058@b11.ingr.com>
Date: 10 May 89 20:02:16 GMT
References: <1429PICHER@MAINE> <May.3.00.55.09.1989.3427@paul.rutgers.edu> <10429@ihlpb.ATT.COM>
Distribution: usa
Organization: Intergraph Corp. Huntsville, AL
Lines: 15

In article <10429@ihlpb.ATT.COM>, res@ihlpb.ATT.COM (Rich Strebendt) writes:
> In article <2306@laidbak.UUCP>, jeq@laidbak.UUCP (Jonathan E. Quist) writes:
> > In article <6937@ecsvax.UUCP> cjl@ecsvax.UUCP (Charles J. Lord) writes:
> > 
> > What is the point of going through the EIT/PE exams? ...
> 
> For many engineers, there is no reason.  The PE certification is, for them, a
> neat trophy to hang on the wall.  For other engineers it is a necessity.
> 

I was told by one of my professors (who owns a corporation, consulting
of course), that AL requires a corp.  having engineering as its main
business, (however you define that), must have a PE on its Board.  With
AL being the backward state that everyone knows it is :) I would be
surprised if other states didn't have similar rules.