Critical reasoning — identify implicit assumptions Statement: The integrated steel plants in India will no longer have to depend on imports for continuous casting refractories. Assumptions: I. Continuous casting refractories are required by Indian steel plants. II. There is significant demand for continuous casting refractories.

Introduction / Context:
The statement asserts that imports for a specific input—continuous casting refractories—will no longer be needed by integrated steel plants in India. We must determine the minimal assumption(s) that make this assertion meaningful.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Claim: Dependence on imports for continuous casting refractories will end.
• Assumption I: Such refractories are in fact required by Indian steel plants.
• Assumption II: There is notable market demand for these refractories.

Concept / Approach:
Ending “dependence” presupposes a need; if there were no requirement, there would be nothing to depend on. However, the claim does not require that demand be large or “significant” in a market sense—mere necessity for operations suffices.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
“No longer depend on imports” typically indicates new domestic capability. That rests on existence of need, not on the size of the market.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Only II / Either / Both: Import unnecessary market-intensity assumptions.
• Neither: Overlooks the basic necessity presupposed by “dependence.”

Common Pitfalls:
Conflating operational necessity with market magnitude; assuming the statement comments on demand size rather than supply source.

Final Answer:
Only assumption I is implicit