The International Space Station (ISS) will provide long-term missions which will enable the astronauts to live and work, as well as, conduct research in a microgravity environment. The dominant factor in space affecting the crew is "weightlessness" which creates a challenge for establishing workstation microgravity design requirements. The crewmembers will work at various workstations such as Human Research Facility (HRF), Microgravity Sciences Glovebox (MSG) and Life Sciences Glovebox (LSG). Since the crew will spend considerable amount of time at these workstations, it is critical that ergonomic design requirements are integral part of design and development effort. In order to achieve this goal, the Space Human Factors Laboratory in the Johnson Space Center Flight Crew Support Division has been tasked to conduct integrated evaluations of workstations and associated crew restraints. Thus, a two-phase approach was used: 1) ground and microgravity evaluations of the physical dimensions and layout of the workstation components, and 2) human modeling analyses of the user interface. Computer-based human modeling evaluations were an important part of the approach throughout the design and development process. Human modeling during the conceptual design phase included crew reach and accessibility of individual equipment, as well as, crew restraint needs. During later design phases, human modeling has been used in conjunction with ground reviews and microgravity evaluations of the mock-ups in order to verify the human factors requirements. (Specific examples will be discussed.) This two-phase approach was the most efficient method to determine ergonomic design characteristics for workstations and restraints. The real-time evaluations provided a hands-on implementation in a microgravity environment. On the other hand, only a limited number of participants could be tested. The human modeling evaluations provided a more detailed analysis of the setup. The issues identified during the real-time testing were investigated in the human modeling analyses. In some cases, the opposite was true where preliminary human modeling analyses provided the design engineers with critical issues that needed to be addressed further. This extensive approach provided an effective means to fully address ergonomic design considerations and accurately identify critical issues.