
The 2017 GA meeting took place on Thursday 4 May 2017 in Karlsruhe, Germany and was a resounding success with attendance reaching 60%, the highest since 2010. Hosted by Cronimet Holding GmbH, the meeting lasted 5 hours and saw several key decisions taken by way of vote.
Some highlights:
- Change of Governance: Election of Tim Hird (Prince-Erachem) as Chairman; Dr Bernd Friede (Elkem) as First Vice Chair; Arnaud Vigier (Eramet) as Second Vice Chair; and Dr Doreen McGough (MARA) as Secretary General
- Approval of an established SIEF data-sharing model in accordance with regulation 2016/9
- Approval of the 2017 workplan and budget
- Approval of plan to share consortium-owned OECD/GLP studies for K-REACH registration purposes

Expert Review of Existing Data
The EU's REACH Regulation requires the use of existing data that is both relevant and reliable. Recital 17 states: “All available and relevant information on substances on their own, in preparations. and in articles should be collected to assist in identifying hazardous properties." Annex VI Step 1 states: "The registrant should gather all existing available test data on the substance to be registered...this would include a literature search for relevant information on the substance". Further, the ECHA Guidance on Registration (8.1.3.1) states: “The registrant must perform a thorough, reliable, and well-documented information gathering”.
The Manganese REACH Consortium (MARA) completed a thorough review of the relevant published scientific literature, including information provided from SIEF where available. The analysis is presented as a series of peer-reviewed "expert reports" that aim to critically evaluate the existing data on the potential impacts of manganese and associated inorganic substances.
Each report contains the collective view of an international group of experts. The completion of each report follows a clearly defined process:
- Literature search using appropriate databases and search terms (detailed in each report)
- Evaluation of data and drafting by a specialist(s)
- Review of draft report by a group of scientists
- Peer-review by an expert(s) in the said field
- Finalisation of the report