Bd. did not err in affirming IJ’s denial of asylum application by alien (native of China’s Fujian Province) alleging that she faced significant risk of persecution if forced to return to China due to fact that alien gave birth to two children while in U.S. in violation of China’s one-child policy. While Bd. and IJ based denial on finding that alien could avoid any persecution by not registering children and simply paying fine and sending children to private entities for schooling and medical care, Ct. was critical of basing asylum outcome on such finding since other evidence indicated that alien still could be subject to forced sterilization in Fujian Province. However, Ct. affirmed Bd.’s decision, where alien failed to present evidence regarding her and her husband’s financial inability to pay social compensation fee and other costs if forced to return to China in light of other evidence suggesting that they could pay such fees and costs.