DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-50,517

CARL ZEISS IMT CORPORATION
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA

Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility
To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance

In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as
amended (19 USC 2273), the Department of Labor herein presents the
results of an investigation regarding certification of eligibility
to apply for worker adjustment assistance. The group eligibility
requirements for directly-impacted (primary) workers under Section
222(a) the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, can be satisfied in
either of two ways:
I. Section (a)(2)(A) all of the following must be satisfied:
A. a significant number or proportion of the workers in such
workers' firm, or an appropriate subdivision of the firm,
have become totally or partially separated, or are
threatened to become totally or partially separated;
B. the sales or production, or both, of such firm or
subdivision have decreased absolutely; and
C. increased imports of articles like or directly competitive
with articles produced by such firm or subdivision have
contributed importantly to such workers' separation or
threat of separation and to the decline in sales or
production of such firm or subdivision; or

II. Section (a)(2)(B) both of the following must be satisfied:

A. a significant number or proportion of the workers in such
workers' firm, or an appropriate subdivision of the
firm, have become totally or partially separated, or are
threatened to become totally or partially separated;
B. there has been a shift in production by such workers' firm
or subdivision to a foreign country of articles like or
directly competitive with articles which are produced by
such firm or subdivision; and

C. One of the following must be satisfied:
1. the country to which the workers' firm has shifted
production of the articles is a party to a free trade
agreement with the United States;
2. the country to which the workers' firm has shifted
production of the articles is a beneficiary country
under the Andean Trade Preference Act, African Growth
and Opportunity Act, or the Caribbean Basin Economic
Recovery Act; or
3. there has been or is likely to be an increase in
imports of articles that are like or directly
competitive with articles which are or were produced
by such firm or subdivision.

The investigation was initiated on January 8, 2003 in response
to a petition filed on behalf of workers of Carl Zeiss IMT
Corporation, Minneapolis, Minnesota. The workers produce
industrial measuring equipment. The investigation revealed that
criteria I.C. and II.B. have not been met.
The investigation revealed that the subject company did not
shift industrial measuring equipment production abroad and did
not increase import purchases of industrial measuring equipment
during the relevant time periods.
The Department of Labor conducted a survey of the subject
company's major customers regarding their purchases of industrial
measuring equipment during the time periods 2001 and 2002. The
survey revealed no increased customer import purchases during the
periods of decline at the subject company.
Petitioners also filed as a secondarily-affected company
alleging that the subject company supplied components to a trade
affected firm whose workers were certified eligible for Trade
Adjustment Assistance. The investigation revealed no existing
TAA certifications for the customer mentioned in the allegation,
Pontiac-GMC, Pontiac, Michigan.
Conclusion
After careful review, I determine that all workers of Carl
Zeiss IMT Corporation, Minneapolis, Minnesota are denied
eligibility to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of
the Trade Act of 1974, as amended.

Signed in Washington, D. C. this 25th day of March 2003


/s/Richard Church
_______________________________
RICHARD CHURCH
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance