sec.109Validation for reliance on particular maps

### sec.109 Validation for reliance on particular maps This section applies if, before the commencement of this section— the chief executive— assessed, as the assessment manager or a concurrence agency, a vegetation clearing application against a regional vegetation management code; or assessed, as a concurrence agency, a concurrence agency application against a regional vegetation management code; and the code referred to a document it called the ‘vegetation management watercourse map’; and the chief executive, in assessing the application against the code, relied on the document; and when the application was assessed, the document was known by any of the following names— ‘ Vegetation Management Act Remnant Watercourses Version 2.1’; ‘ Vegetation Management Act Remnant Watercourses 25K Version 2.1’; ‘Vegetation management watercourse map part 1 ’; ‘Vegetation management watercourse map part 2 ’. The chief executive’s reliance on the document is taken to be, and always to have been, valid for assessing the application. s 109 ins 2013 No. 23 s 225 (sec.109-ssec.1) This section applies if, before the commencement of this section— the chief executive— assessed, as the assessment manager or a concurrence agency, a vegetation clearing application against a regional vegetation management code; or assessed, as a concurrence agency, a concurrence agency application against a regional vegetation management code; and the code referred to a document it called the ‘vegetation management watercourse map’; and the chief executive, in assessing the application against the code, relied on the document; and when the application was assessed, the document was known by any of the following names— ‘ Vegetation Management Act Remnant Watercourses Version 2.1’; ‘ Vegetation Management Act Remnant Watercourses 25K Version 2.1’; ‘Vegetation management watercourse map part 1 ’; ‘Vegetation management watercourse map part 2 ’. (sec.109-ssec.2) The chief executive’s reliance on the document is taken to be, and always to have been, valid for assessing the application. - (a) the chief executive— (i) assessed, as the assessment manager or a concurrence agency, a vegetation clearing application against a regional vegetation management code; or (ii) assessed, as a concurrence agency, a concurrence agency application against a regional vegetation management code; and - (i) assessed, as the assessment manager or a concurrence agency, a vegetation clearing application against a regional vegetation management code; or - (ii) assessed, as a concurrence agency, a concurrence agency application against a regional vegetation management code; and - (b) the code referred to a document it called the ‘vegetation management watercourse map’; and - (c) the chief executive, in assessing the application against the code, relied on the document; and - (d) when the application was assessed, the document was known by any of the following names— (i) ‘ Vegetation Management Act Remnant Watercourses Version 2.1’; (ii) ‘ Vegetation Management Act Remnant Watercourses 25K Version 2.1’; (iii) ‘Vegetation management watercourse map part 1 ’; (iv) ‘Vegetation management watercourse map part 2 ’. - (i) ‘ Vegetation Management Act Remnant Watercourses Version 2.1’; - (ii) ‘ Vegetation Management Act Remnant Watercourses 25K Version 2.1’; - (iii) ‘Vegetation management watercourse map part 1 ’; - (iv) ‘Vegetation management watercourse map part 2 ’. - (i) assessed, as the assessment manager or a concurrence agency, a vegetation clearing application against a regional vegetation management code; or - (ii) assessed, as a concurrence agency, a concurrence agency application against a regional vegetation management code; and - (i) ‘ Vegetation Management Act Remnant Watercourses Version 2.1’; - (ii) ‘ Vegetation Management Act Remnant Watercourses 25K Version 2.1’; - (iii) ‘Vegetation management watercourse map part 1 ’; - (iv) ‘Vegetation management watercourse map part 2 ’.