Statement–Assumption (Coimbatore Bypass and Road Standards): Statement: “The new 28-km Coimbatore Bypass surpasses conventional standards in road-building. An example of advanced highway engineering, it brings destinations closer, cuts travelling time, and reduces fatigue.” Assumptions: I) The new Coimbatore Bypass is comparable to European highways. II) Conventional standards in road-building should be replaced by advanced highway engineering.

Introduction / Context:
The statement praises a specific road project for exceeding “conventional standards,” presenting it as an illustration of advanced engineering and highlighting benefits (reduced time/fatigue). The question is about what must be assumed for this praise to hold.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Project: 28-km Coimbatore Bypass.
• Claim: surpasses conventional standards; yields user benefits.

Concept / Approach:
Assumptions must be minimal necessities. References to European highways or policy prescriptions to replace standards are extra claims not required for the descriptive praise to make sense.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Assumption I (European benchmark): Not required. The statement never compares with Europe; it compares with domestic “conventional standards.” Praise stands without any international benchmark.Assumption II (replace standards): The statement is descriptive (“surpasses”) rather than prescriptive (“should replace”). A recommendation to overhaul standards is not necessary for the description to be valid.

Verification / Alternative check:
Negate I (not comparable to Europe) and the domestic-superiority claim remains intact. Negate II (no need to replace standards) and the praise still holds as a one-off example of excellence.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
“Only I/Only II/Either” import benchmarks or policies absent from the text.

Common Pitfalls:
Equating “exceeds conventional standards” with “meets top international standards,” or reading a policy imperative into a descriptive commendation.

Final Answer:
Neither I nor II is implicit.