In August 2025, our Editor, Rebecca Thomas, had the honour of meeting with Brian Williams, Group Executive Vice President, Environment Testing (North America) and Regional & Multi-Business Lines (APAC), International Business Line – Environment Testing at Eurofins.
We hope you enjoy reading this short interview, which features valuable insights from Brian’s extensive international experience, particularly his perspective on the environmental testing landscape in the United States.
An Interview with Brian Williams, Eurofins
Let’s start with a quick overview of your career to date.
Yes, it has been a bit of a journey to date! When I graduated with a BSc in Australian Environmental Studies (AES) from Griffith University in 1985, the Environmental Sector was really in its’ infancy. I was fortunate to secure a lab technician role at the ALS lab that was in my home suburb of Stafford in 1986, and then the ride began. Hard to imagine, but back in 1986 when ALS had one water chemist…it was me! I got into leadership roles through mineral/geochemistry testing, then back into Environment Testing from 1990. Building and commissioning the Sydney operation in 1995 was a big inflexion point. Then on to leadership roles as GM Aust, Asia and Europe. After 31 years at ALS, I joined the Eurofins network in 2017 as a member of their Group Operating Council (GOC). Great opportunity to firstly work out of Europe and then USA from 2018. The US Environmental Testing Market is massive – about 8 to 10 times the size of the Australian market. Lots of opportunities, but first there was a network to build, systems to put in place, a LIMS to configure and roll out. That was done largely in the first few years, concurrent to building a super team of technical and business leaders. I took on the International Business Line Lead (IBLL) for Eurofins Environment Testing in 2020, which was a great opportunity, firstly to reconnect me with the ANZ market, and secondly to give me an opportunity to gain exposure to all of the global Environmental Markets. The Eurofins network has by far the largest Environment Testing footprint in the world, so, yes, I do pinch myself every morning with how fortunate I have been, as a ‘Brisbane boy’ with a Brisbane Environmental Science degree to have such great opportunities and exposure.
What first attracted you to the environmental sector, particularly the contaminated land and groundwater space?
I always had an interest in Environmental matters, that was really the primary driver for jumping straight from high school to the AES degree at Griffith University. Those were the days when Damming the Franklin River was the big issue, and Peter Garrett headed the Nuclear Disarmament Party! I remember doing a salinity profile study across groundwater wells on North Stradbroke Island as part of my degree. A great time to be in late teens and early 20’s. Sustainability and Beneficial re-use loomed prominent for me. On the back of US Superfund site activity, the Australian Environment Industry really began to get legs. Having a background in Mine/Geochemical testing, I had early exposure to groundwater well monitoring to trace Tailings Dam contamination. Then there was the early mega contaminate land projects – Cockatoo Island, Mortlake, Botany, Homebush all in Sydney, Newstead in Brisbane, then real traction and coordination at a regulatory level in Australia, first with NEPC which evolved to be the NEPM. There was so much to do, and so much happening…impossible not to fall in love with the sector.
Having worked in the U.S. for 8 years, how has that experience shaped your perspective on environmental risk, regulation, and site investigation approaches?
Like I mentioned earlier, the US Environment Sector is massive. There is quite a complex overlay of State Regulations, Federal Regulation, EPA Programs, Protocols for mega industrials and government agencies (DOD, DOE). From a testing perspective, this brings with it an array of specific certifications at the various levels, many of which are overlapping and oddly (some) mutually exclusive. At times this framework trips over itself and slows down processes. NEPM in Australia and single accreditation bodies (NATA in Australia and IANZ in NZ), seem to be a far more efficient approach to achieving positive outcomes in a timely manner. That stated, there is a thoroughness in the US that extends through initial DQO’s, risk and impact assessment, data validation, remediation and finally long-term monitoring, which is to be admired, with lessons to be learned.
From your vantage point, how is the current U.S. administration influencing the environmental sector, both domestically and globally?
The administration has certainly got the attention of the Environment sector…no question! That stated, to date overall impact to boots on the ground has been limited. As per my response to your previous question, there is a complex overlay of regulations and protocols in the US. Much of what we have seen by way of budget cuts has been administrative – meaning that boots on the ground have not been overly impacted. There was a definite ‘pause’ on project activity in Q1, but realistically since then it has been largely ‘business as usual’, with the exception of large international USAID projects – where funding was cut in short order. We have seen a small down shift in air testing work, but hardly noticeable. Other drivers like PFAS have remained strong. Yes, compound lists may have been trimmed and MDLs rationalised, but still investigation and monitoring continues. Do I see the US ‘rationalisation’ spreading to a global phenomenon? In a word, ‘No’. We cannot reverse the fact that globally ESG is a huge driver. People want a clean environment, they want clean drinking water, they want accountability. You only have to look at the big beautiful ‘Brown Snake’ that winds through Brisbane – back in the 1970’s, it was not such a beautiful thing. The Environmental Social Conscience of the people forced the hand of governments. ‘Forever Chemicals’ are named such since they last in the Environment a lot longer than any single administration.
You’ve worked across Australia, the U.S., and internationally. What are some of the most notable differences you’ve observed in how various jurisdictions approach site contamination, remediation, and regulatory compliance?
Like I mentioned earlier, the alignment between Local, State and Federal governments, the NEPM and the uniform accreditation system that we have in ANZ are a massive positive. Industry organisations like ALGA, ACLCA, AWA and ELIG are also very important to driving consistency and efficiency. Sure, we can get better, but in comparison to bodies stepping over themselves, we are in a good place. From a testing perspective, NEPM has taken a sensible ‘performance based’ approached – meaning that accredited laboratories can establish equivalence with a documented method, so long as after thorough and rigorous validation, the method is deemed to perform as per the standard, with no bias. What this does, is to open the door for cutting edge detection technologies and method enhancements that facilitate better turnaround time, more robustness, and less waste. The alternative is a ‘prescriptive’ approach – which in some cases still exists in the U.S. When test methods are ‘prescriptive’, until the promulgated method is formally updated (which sometimes can take decades), laboratories are obligated to follow the precise protocol. This means that older instrumentation/technologies remain unchallenged, even though superior options are available. Some ‘prescriptive’ methods use outdated and wasteful preparation and extraction techniques. ‘Performance based’ is definitely the way to go. This is the approach widely adopted through Europe, Asia and LATAM. The UK and Japan are probably a bit more toward ‘prescriptive’ but not as much as the U.S.
What regulatory trends are currently emerging in the U.S., particularly in soil and groundwater risk management? How do these compare with what we’re seeing in Australia?
In the U.S, the new administration is pushing more from the federal realm, back to the states. I can see rationale for this but suspect the likely outcome will be more complexity and inconsistency in approach, guidelines, and contaminant thresholds depending on the political affiliation of the state. Not sure if this is a good thing. At the DOD/DOE level, it looks like sanity will prevail and a consistent approach across sites will be maintained, regardless of location. The U.S is taking some steps toward ‘performance based’ methods, and maybe some of the administrations cuts will result in streamlined approvals. The UCMR (Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule) programme in the U.S is impressive and proactive. This is an organised study approach (every 5 years) which began in 1996 as UCMR1 (just completing UCMR5 in 2025) to understand background levels and incidence of contaminants in drinking water, before they are regulated. Possibly a similar organised and coordinated approach in ANZ should be considered?
The Eurofins network operates globally, can you share how the company is embedding sustainability into its operations, particularly in laboratory practices and analytical methods?
At Eurofins, embedding corporate sustainability principles in our business strategy and the way we operate is an essential component in both creating long-term value and achieving our mission of contributing to a healthier and safer world. As a group of companies that work to safeguard the environment through many of our testing activities, considering our impact on the environment is a priority as is a commitment to sustainable operations, and this is realised through energy efficiency and solar projects, choosing green energy sources, using EVs for couriers, right through to laboratory methods.
In the environment testing scope the ‘performance based’ method approach really supercharged the sustainability push. Now, promulgated methods like USEPA 3511 are also facilitating sustainability. Sample miniaturisation has been a journey over the last 15 years but is now the real deal. Newer more sensitive laboratory instrumentation requires less sample concentration to achieve low detection levels. This translates in materially lower solvent usage – sometimes by a factor of 40 or even 100! That means less solvent waste, and therefore less CO2 generated. Low test sample volume requirements, means less time required for field collection, less manual handling issues (field and laboratory), less cubic space required for shipping, less cool room space, order of magnitude ease as a result of the transition to robotic or automated laboratory processes, more data consistency, smaller laboratory footprint and less energy consumption.
Digitisation is becoming increasingly important across the environmental sector. How is Eurofins thinking about digital innovation and its role in the future of the industry?
Like Sustainability, digitalisation is a global initiative for the Eurofins network. As a sector, Environmental (that is Consultancies, Industry, Labs) needs to make up some ground in comparison to Clinical/Pathology, Food, Minerals, Air travel, etc. These sectors embraced digitalisation years (if not decades) ago, took the ‘heat’ and the disruption that came with transition, and today are well and truly digital – end to end. Think about how we book a flight, buy a movie ticket, buy products online, or get blood test results today compared to 30 years ago. Now think about the fact that we are still largely using handwritten COCs and relying on PDF reports in the Environment sector (yes, I know we use EDD’s, but really, that is just one baby step). The European market is by far the most advanced when it comes to digitalisation in the Environment sector. We have laboratories in Europe that are almost 100% digital when it comes to sample submission (by eCOC) and direct data loads. Most of our Food testing laboratories globally are close to utilising 100% electronic sample submission. Our Environmental laboratories are ready and willing to adopt and drive this approach. When I talk to executives from the big consultancies, they too are just as enthusiastic…however, when it comes to the ‘rubber hitting the road’ (the field ops), then the enthusiasm can tend to wane. There are some great digitalisation enablers out there – EQuIS, ESdat, SampleServe laboratory provided eCOC, amongst others – these go much further than ‘just’ submitting a sample electronically and generating an EDD. There is a digital pathway, right from project inception to AI assisted reporting/recommendations/mapping, etc. …we as a sector need to work harder to embrace digitalisation. Paper COC ‘should’ be for yesterday.
You’re heading back to Australia for ecoforum, what are you looking forward to most at this year’s event? Any sessions or conversations you’re excited about? And what can delegates expect to hear and see from Eurofins Environment Testing at the conference?
Travel has prevented me from attending ecoforum for 15 years (even though I have remained an avid reader of e-cronicle) …but not this year, especially with the event being held in hometown Brisbane! So, one thing that I am really looking forward to catching up with is quite a few long timers in the sector. The ecoforum program and speakers this year are especially exciting. PFAS is very clearly a popular topic…understandably! There is also a great mix of local and international
speakers. There will be some great things to see from Eurofins Environment Testing. We have four speakers. Taryn McKnight (PFAS Mineralisation in Thermal Technologies) and Dr. Sarah Choyke (Emerging Contaminants and Non-Target Analysis) from the US; and two from the ANZ Team, Dr. Julia Jaeger (Airborne Microplastics) and Dr. Bob Symons (Analysis & Risks – PFAS, Microplastics, PPCP’s in Biosolids). Our speakers and representatives from the Australia and New Zealand team would love to meet you! Can’t wait!
And finally, tell us about the new Eurofins Environment Testing laboratory opening in Queensland. What capability will it bring to the region, and how will it support contaminated land and groundwater professionals working across the region?
This is really exciting and probably long overdue. Eurofins Environment Testing Brisbane is getting a brand-new laboratory – state of the art, with capacity three times the current. This completes the trifecta of major laboratory upgrades on the Australian eastern seaboard – Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane. The Brisbane laboratory will be only two doors down from the current facility in Murarrie and will be open for business in Q1 2026. This complements the Eurofins network of laboratories in Australia and New Zealand with locations also in Newcastle, Perth, Auckland and Wellington and numerous service centres which operate in Adelaide, Geelong, Launceston, Darwin and Townsville. Support for the Brisbane business in recent years has been outstanding. With ongoing increased demand and 2032 Olympic Games related projects on the horizon, this full-service dedicated Environment Testing Laboratory will provide local testing for all of the environmental stables, plus Dioxins, PFAS and Acid Sulphate Soils.
Brian Williams
Group Executive Vice President, Environment Testing (North America) Regional & Multi Business Lines (APAC) International Business Line – Environment Testing
Eurofins Environment Testing