7

I am a Physics PhD and I have my F1 visa interview in a few days. I recently heard from my friend that there are some technical words that I should avoid using in the interview. This word list is known as Technical Alert List (TAL). Is this really true or just some rumours?

Shravan Patel
  • 111
  • 5
  • 2
    Best advise is answer questions truthfully and understandable. Logical coherent. – stephanmg Dec 12 '20 at 16:20
  • 6
    Have you tried a Google search? It seems to turn up many useful results, from large reputable universities. The issue is not so much using a technical word but the intent to work in a sensitive field (one with national security implications and export/technnology transfer restrictions). Some of them are pretty obvious (“reactive armor and warhead defeat systems”), others seem very broad ("biochemistry”). – Relaxed Dec 12 '20 at 16:30
  • 5
    The only issue I could imagine is that if you do not intend to work on anything sensitive but use a word that might suggest you do to an uninformed consular worker, your case might be referred to the Department of State for a more thorough evaluation, causing delays to your visa application. – Relaxed Dec 12 '20 at 16:34

1 Answers1

16

The Technology Alert List is real, but it is not a list of words to avoid in interviews. It is a list of "critical fields" of activity. Students engaging in those critical fields are considered at higher risk of "violating U.S. laws prohibiting the export of goods, technology or sensitive information from the U.S." (espionage). Engagement in one of those fields may "render you inadmissible under INA section 212 (a)(3)(a)".

In summary, it's not about what words you say in your interview, it's about what area of study you are engaging in. If you are studying in "nuclear technology", somehow managing to avoid saying the words "nuclear" or "technology" are not going to make you admissible. You should of course refrain from making it sound like you are working in one of these areas if you are not, remembering that immigration officials are probably not scientists. Avoiding calling your work "nuclear" or "encryption" if possible is probably good.

The list of critical areas is quite wide-ranging and not obviously dangerous, ranging from "biochemistry" to "urban planning".

An example discussing the list can be found here: https://www.vanderbilt.edu/isss/immigration/travel/visa-renewal-information/technology-alert/

DJClayworth
  • 66,326
  • 10
  • 167
  • 233
  • 26
    An anecdote of interest: I used to work in a branch of theoretical physics which we would call "nuclear theory" when speaking to other physicists, even though it had nearly zero relevance to nuclear weapons or anything weaponizable. Some of my colleagues learned the hard way not to use that name for the field when talking to immigration officers! So in some cases, there is something to be said for avoiding certain terms. – David Z Dec 13 '20 at 01:44
  • 2
    @DavidZ So what was the best name for the field to use? – camden_kid Dec 13 '20 at 11:00
  • 5
    I also remember when Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) was called Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR), until it was changed for similar reasons. – DJClayworth Dec 13 '20 at 15:08
  • 3
    @camden_kid Most of the time they'd be satisfied with just "physics", but if not, "theoretical physics" or "particle physics" would do fine. Honestly pretty much anything that didn't include the word "nuclear". Immigration officials don't care about the details. – David Z Dec 13 '20 at 23:16
  • "Theoretical physics" is probably fine, although nowadays it might not be enough; "particle physics" can still get you into administrative processing. But this is from experiences of Chinese students who are probably facing much tougher checks in relation to national security. – xngtng Dec 14 '20 at 08:22