• Residents question environmental and health risks
• CEA says site is approved only for grinding and packing clinker

Parents and residents in the Seeduwa-Katunayake area have raised concerns over a proposed cement-related facility in Liyanagemulla, claiming that its location could pose environmental and public health risks.

Speaking to The Daily Morning yesterday (20), residents said the land had initially been intended for a hotel, but that plans had reportedly changed around 2020 to develop a cement-related project. They said the company subsequently obtained annual approvals from the Central Environmental Authority (CEA), with the proposed operation described as a mini cement facility involving the grinding and repacking of cement rather than cement manufacturing.

However, residents questioned whether such a facility should be permitted in the area, which they described as highly populated and environmentally sensitive.

They pointed out that the site is located about 100 metres from the Negombo Lagoon and close to the Muthurajawela mangrove ecosystem. Several schools, including international schools, are also located in the vicinity, they said.

Residents also questioned approvals reportedly granted by the Urban Development Authority (UDA), claiming that construction approval was granted in 2025. They further alleged that the approval had been issued on a government holiday.

Repeated attempts to contact the UDA Director General for a response were unsuccessful at the time of going to press.

When contacted for comment, CEA Director General R S P Kapila Rajapaksha stressed the CEA had not granted approval for cement manufacturing at the site. He said the operation was limited to grinding and packing clinkers manufactured elsewhere.

“We have not given an environmental licence for cement manufacturing at this location. No manufacturing takes place there. The clinker is manufactured elsewhere, brought to this site, ground and then packed,” he said.

Explaining the difference, Rajapaksha said cement manufacturing involved bringing limestone and other compounds together, processing them in a kiln and firing them to produce clinker. He said this was the stage that could cause significant environmental impacts, particularly through emissions.

“That process does not take place here,” he said.

He said the approval granted for the site covered the grinding and packing of already-manufactured clinker, subject to environmental conditions.

“Even for this process, we have imposed conditions that it should operate as a completely closed-loop system and that special measures should be taken to control emissions,” he said.

Rajapaksha said the environmental recommendations for the project had been issued in 2022 and had been renewed annually.

“The environmental recommendations for the project were given in 2022. We were not the ones who gave them, and they were not given recently. The licence has been renewed annually,” he said.

He said an environmental recommendation may have been issued when the company initially applied to establish the industry, possibly following an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) study.

He added that the CEA had more recently issued an environmental assessment report and required the company to prepare a management plan to prevent environmental damage from its operations.

“When we took over, construction had already reached a certain stage. When they came to renew the licence, we asked them to prepare a management plan to prevent any environmental damage that could arise from the current operations. They have submitted that plan,” he said.

Rajapaksha said the company had subsequently sought permission to carry out additional construction at the rear of the site, but that the CEA had rejected the request because a 100-metre buffer zone had to be maintained between the site and the Negombo Lagoon.

“They made requests on about two occasions to carry out construction in that area, but we did not approve either request,” he said.

He said the operation currently had approval based on the environmental recommendations issued in 2022, which had been renewed annually.

Responding to further questions, Rajapaksha said the process did not generate effluent and that the CEA had not permitted any discharge of waste or other material from the site.

“It is a dry process, and we have not permitted any discharge of waste or other material. Even from the waste treatment plant that is already there, we have not permitted treated effluent to be discharged into that area,” he said.

He added that if any unauthorised discharge took place, the CEA had the authority to revoke the approval.