I
106TH CONGRESS
1ST SESSION
H. R. 987
To require the Secretary of Labor to wait for completion of a National
Academy of Sciences study before promulgating a standard or guideline
on ergonomics.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
MARCH 4, 1999
Mr. BLUNT (for himself, Mr. BALLENGER, Mr. ARMEY, Mr. DELAY, Mr.
WATTS of Oklahoma, Mr. STENHOLM, Mr. GOODE, Mr. PICKETT, Mr.
BONILLA, Mr. BOEHNER, Mr. CUNNINGHAM, Mr. BURR of North Caro-
lina, Mr. HEFLEY, Mr. MCINTOSH, Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania, Mr.
HALL of Texas, Mr. SISISKY, Mr. TANNER, Mr. JOHN, Mr. MARTINEZ,
Mr. CLEMENT, and Mr. GOODLING) introduced the following bill; which
was referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce
A BILL
To require the Secretary of Labor to wait for completion
of a National Academy of Sciences study before promul-
gating a standard or guideline on ergonomics.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Workplace Preserva-
tion Act’’.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
(a) Congress finds the following:
(1) The Department of Labor, Occupational
Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has an-
nounced that it plans to propose regulations during
1999 to regulate ‘‘ergonomics’’ in the workplace. A
draft of OSHA’s ergonomics regulation became
available in January 1999.
(2) A July, 1997, report by the National Insti-
tute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
reviewing epidemiological studies that have been con-
ducted of ‘‘work related musculoskeletal disorders of
the neck, upper extremity, and low back’’ showed
that there is insufficient evidence to assess the level
of risk to workers from repetitive motions. Such
characterization would be necessary to write an effi-
cient and effective regulation.
(3) An August 1998, workshop on ‘‘work relat-
ed musculoskeletal injuries’’ held by the National
Academy of Sciences also reviewed existing research
on musculoskeletal disorders. It also showed that
there is insufficient evidence to assess the level of
risk to workers from repetitive motions.
(4) The risk of OSHA imposing a ‘‘solution’’ to
ailments and disorders that are grouped as ‘‘repet-
itive stress injuries’’ and ‘‘musculoskeletal disorders’’
before sufficient information about the diagnosis,
causes, and prevention of such injuries and disorders
is shown by the fact that such disorders have often
increased in workplaces and industries in which
OSHA has focused ergonomics-related enforcement
actions under the General Duty Clause of the Occu-
pational Safety and Health Act, while such disorders
have been decreasing in workplaces generally.
(5) In October, 1998, Congress and the Presi-
dent agreed upon a comprehensive study by the Na-
tional Academy of Science of the medical and sci-
entific evidence regarding musculoskeletal disorders.
The study is intended to evaluate the basic questions
about diagnosis and causes of such disorders. Given
the level of uncertainty and dispute about these
basic questions, and Congress’ intention that they be
addressed in a comprehensive study by the National
Academy of Science, it is premature for OSHA to
decide that a regulation on ergonomics is necessary
or appropriate to improving workers’ health and
safety before such study is completed.
(6) The estimated costs of OSHA’s proposed
ergonomics regulation range from OSHA’s low na-
tional estimate of $20,000,000,000 to some single
industry 
costs 
of 
$18,000,000,000 
to
$30,000,000,000. Any regulation with this potential