May 6-7, 2003	The Committee recommends to OSHA a symposium at an academic level to discuss critical issues of research. NACE, NIOSH, and OSHA would offer advice concerning the forum, and a sponsoring university would organize the event. The speakers and panelists would make a brief presentation and answer questions.
May 6-7, 2003	Two speaker recommendations made by the Committee for future NACE meetings were: Dr. Hal Corwin, a neurologist The authors of two National Academy of Sciences reports on ergonomics.
September 23, 2003	The Committee recommended that OSHA invite an expert on building a business case for ergonomics to the January NACE meeting.
September 23, 2003	The Committee recommended that OSHA invite an expert on social marketing to come to the January NACE to present and provide information.
September 23, 2003	NACE recommended that the OSHA Web site undergo enhancements. Improvements include creating an enhanced search engine that would prioritize search results and eliminate work arrangement inconsistencies, altering the layout of the homepage to emphasize different subject areas and make it easier for users to move within the site, and creating a targeted CD-ROM that would be available to people without the Internet.
September 23, 2003	NACE recommended that the success story templates on OSHA’s Web site be enhanced.
September 23, 2003	NACE recommended that development of the Early Adopter’s Program move forward.
September 23, 2003	NACE endorsed the symposium plans and in doing so, approved the draft Federal Register notice announcing the symposium.
January 27-28, 2004	The Committee recommended that OSHA consider developing guidelines for the 16 industries or industry groups chosen based on the Guidelines Workgroup criteria, excluding the three industries for which guidelines are already complete or are in development*. Industries are listed below, followed by the ranking they received from the Workgroup: Nursing Homes*, 1 Trucking & Courier, 2 Air Transport Scheduled, 3 Hospitals, 4 Groceries—Wholesale, 5 Motor Vehicle-Equipment, 6 Motor Vehicles and Car Bodies, 7 Plumbing, HVAC, 8 Department Stores, 9 Retail Grocery*, 10 Local and Suburban Transportation, 11 Household Furniture, 12 Lumber/Building Materials—Retail, 13 Motor Vehicle Parts and Accessories, 14 Fabricated Structural Metal Products, 15 Millwork, Plywood and Structural, 16 Aircraft, 17 Miscellaneous Plastics Products, 18 Poultry*, 19 When considering development of guidelines for the 16 industries, the Committee recommended that OSHA consider the "Other" criteria, established by the Guidelines Workgroup, when making specific industry selections, instead of making choices based on the most number of MSD cases to the least number.
January 27-28, 2004	The Committee recommended that OSHA develop a resource guide that outlines a process for identifying and quantifying costs and benefits, both short- and long-term, related to ergonomics.
January 27-28, 2004	The Committee recommended that OSHA invite the American Society of Safety Engineers’ Workgroup on building a case for ergonomics to present at the next NACE meeting or subcommittee meeting.
January 27-28, 2004	The Committee recommended that OSHA collaborate with professional organizations to develop a process for solicitation of success stories.
January 27-28, 2004	The Committee recommended that OSHA contact their cooperative program participants to solicit success stories that could then be posted on OSHA’s Web site using the OSHA template. Ultimately these success stories could be linked to the OSHA Web site.
January 27-28, 2004	The Committee recommended that OSHA solicit case studies and data that were presented by the speakers at the January 27, 2004 Symposium. With the speakers’ permission, this data would be added to OSHA’s Web site.
January 27-28, 2004	The Committee recommended that OSHA provide a speaker at the May 2004 meeting to discuss the Susan Harwood Grant Program.
May 12, 2004	The Committee recommended that OSHA adopt the concept of the Early Adopters program, taking into consideration the related documents given out at the May 2004 meeting, and the minutes that were taken from the meeting.
May 12, 2004	The Committee recommended that OSHA help promote the concept of a Best-Practice Forum through existing collaborations with its education centers, regional offices, existing VPPPA groups, as well as the alliance programs and industry associations. OSHA should develop a best practices toolkit using the existing information that OSHA has on best practices, to help guide other organizations on how to organize a forum. OSHA should also make an effort to collect best practices at conferences and incorporate them into the existing success stories that are posted on OSHA’s Web site.
November 17, 2004	OSHA should consider the following areas for improving the Ergonomics Success Story collection and distribution process: Form with Descriptions of Input Fields Examples of Well-Written Success Stories Disclaimers Key Word Search Capabilities
November 17, 2004	OSHA should consider the following gaps in research and forward them to relevant organizations: More research is needed to examine the validity of techniques used to establish a diagnosis of MSDs. More research is needed to examine the role of psychosocial factors that contribute to or impact the development of MSDs. Studies are needed to develop additional animal models in which the effects of physical loading on living tissues can be studied in a controlled manner. Additional studies are needed to: Examine the validity and reliability of existing exposure assessment methods. Develop additional assessment methods. Additional studies are needed to determine the economic impact to organizations of what are commonly described as ergonomic interventions. More studies are needed addressing the multifactorial causes of MSDs, such as psychosocial, physical, occupational, and non-occupational factors, and their interactions. Additional studies are needed to describe the natural history of diseases or injuries, commonly known as MSDs. Studies are needed regarding factors in Workers’ compensation systems and other statutory payment mechanisms on findings of causation, diagnosis, the duration of the disability, and other outcomes related to what are commonly known as MSDs.
November 17, 2004	The National Advisory Committee on Ergonomics has developed the following points with the intent that they will be useful to guide OSHA concerning the development of future guidelines, outreach and assistance, and research. Ergonomics is a noun, not an adjective. It is recommended that it is used as such in formal documents. Hazards exist in the form of poorly designed work practices and/or workplaces. Ergonomics is a process that can be beneficially used to address job and workplace design – the human interface with the work system. Improved safety characteristics occur in concert with productivity improvements. Once workers no longer need to devote maximum energy to “overcoming” the demands of their work practices and/or workplaces, they can devote those same energies to productivity and quality aspects of their jobs. The pursuit of a single definition of MSDs has not reached consensus. The various/numerous MSD definitions cover a host of conditions limited only by those doing the defining, none of which directly help to reduce the number of such disorders.  OSHA should continue the development of guidelines independent of any final definition of MSDs. MSDs are a consequence of exposures to risk factors of a multi-factorial nature. Although the exact cause of a specific MSD may not be known, and the precise effectiveness of an intervention may not be predictable, the objective of ergonomics is to reduce, to a practical minimum, the demands (e.g., physiological, cognitive, behavioral) of doing the work by controlling these exposures. To this end, a number of tools and guidelines may be useful. Ergonomics should be included in comprehensive occupational safety and health programs. Ergonomics should be integrated into business processes in the same way as Job Safety Analysis, Personal Protective Equipment hazard assessments, process hazard analysis, and similar occupational safety and health tools. It must be recognized that there are non-occupational components (e.g., general health, non-work, leisure, play, and physical daily living activities) that also contribute to the development and occurrence of MSDs. To reach outside the work arena, these components are best addressed by educating the workforce concerning such non-work hazards.