On the E7 through E9 performance evaluation, what marks require substantiation in the comments block?

The correct choice focuses on the specific marking system used in the evaluation process for E7 through E9 ranks, where substantiation in the comments block becomes mandatory for certain ratings. In this context, any mark of 1.0 indicates serious deficiencies in performance, and therefore, requires clear and comprehensive justification to explain the rationale behind such a low rating.

Additionally, a rating of 2.0 can signify an average performance, but when multiple marks of this classification are provided, it also raises the necessity for substantiation—particularly when three 2.0 marks are recorded. This requirement ensures that performance evaluations are fair and supported by clear explanations, especially when they indicate that an individual is not meeting the expected standards.

This emphasis on clarity in performance evaluations helps maintain accountability and transparency within the ranks, ensuring that personnel understand their performance and can work on any identified deficiencies. The items that require comments cultivate a culture of improvement and support within the military environment, aligning with developmental goals. The other options either suggest less stringent requirements for substantiation, which would not align with the established protocols for marking and accountability.