1. (a) Recommendations and rankings by selection boards shall be based upon records of the character, ability, conduct, quality of work, industry, experience, dependability, usefulness, and general performance of members of the Service. Such records may include reports prepared by or on behalf of the Inspector General of the Department of State and the Foreign Service, performance evaluation reports of supervisors, records of commendations, reports of language test scores from the George P. Shultz National Foreign Affairs Training Center, awards, reprimands, and other disciplinary actions, and (with respect to members of the Senior Foreign Service) records of current and prospective assignments.

2. (b) Precepts for selection boards shall include a description of the needs of the Service for performance requirements, skills, and qualities, which are to be considered in recommendations for promotion. The precepts for selection boards responsible for recommending promotions into and within the Senior Foreign Service shall emphasize performance which demonstrates the strong policy formulation capabilities, executive leadership qualities, and highly developed functional and area expertise, which are required for the Senior Foreign Service. The precepts for selection boards shall include, whether the member of the Service or the member of the Senior Foreign Service, as the case may be, has demonstrated—

   1. (1) a willingness and ability to explain United States policies in person and through the media when occupying positions for which such willingness and ability is, to any degree, an element of the member’s duties, or
   2. (2) other experience in public diplomacy.

(Pub. L. 96–465, title I, § 603, Oct. 17, 1980, 94 Stat. 2095; Pub. L. 107–132, § 1(b), Jan. 16, 2002, 115 Stat. 2412; Pub. L. 108–458, title VII, § 7110(c), Dec. 17, 2004, 118 Stat. 3794.)

Amendments 2004—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 108–458 inserted at end “The precepts for selection boards shall include, whether the member of the Service or the member of the Senior Foreign Service, as the case may be, has demonstrated—” and pars. (1) and (2).

2002—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 107–132 substituted “George P. Shultz National Foreign Affairs Training Center” for “Foreign Service Institute”.