Am neither a lawyer nor an expert on GoI rules. Only an academic. The information you list is what you would expect to see on a scientist's professional CV, which is usually public information at universities (not sure about govt labs). These days simply googling can get one a lot of CVs, so if you know at least something (say, names and affiliations) you may get the information. It will of course not have the same authenticity as the exact information that was provided to the Selection Board.
To examine whether you can build a case under
RTI perhaps you should check if (a) there is some other source for the same information, and show that among reasonable possibilities you have found none (b) the selection criteria was meant the pick the best, or just to pick among several who met a threshold (in which case it will be much harder) (c) you can argue that the information you're seeking is what would be contained in a public CV of a scientist, and is not private information (e.g. information about financial records, personal life). Where this last can get tricky is if the form includes both scientist-CV type information, and information about say, family and children. Some of this may be innocuous but its being commingled with purely professional CV info means that some work has to be done to "redact" (blacken or erase) such information.
There may be avenues outside of, or in conjunction with,
RTI. In a university environment, I've seen a couple of times when a negative personnel action appears to have been triggered by confidential external recommendation letters. Once such letters were revealed to the grievant, but with names, addresses and affiliations of the letter-writers carefully redacted. In one school, when letters became the issue, a special committee of 2 (one faculty member [from an allowed set] chosen by the faculty member, the other by the university) read the letters and commented on the whether the interpretation of those letters was fair. I don't know whether these suggest other feasible avenues for pursuing an appeal in your setting. Best,
Murgie