Understanding PAHTs in Victoria
A Preliminary Aboriginal Heritage Test (PAHT) is a specialist assessment process used in Victoria to determine whether a Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP) is required under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Vic) and the Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2018.
PAHTs are used at the early stages of planning and development to confirm whether Aboriginal cultural heritage approval pathways apply to a project. They provide clarity on whether a CHMP is required or whether the proposed activity can proceed without one.
For developers, planners, architects, and landowners, a PAHT is often the first step in understanding Aboriginal heritage requirements in Victoria and managing project risk before design or approvals progress.
This article is provided for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Heritage obligations are site-specific and project-specific.
Strata Heritage only recommends a PAHT when the evidence clearly supports it, though outcomes can still depend on professional judgement and may sometimes be refused even if well prepared.
Contact Strata Heritage via webform or call 0429 339 923 to check if a PAHT is suitable for your project.
What is a PAHT in Victoria?
Preliminary Aboriginal Heritage Assessments
A Preliminary Aboriginal Heritage Test (PAHT) is a formal assessment tool created under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 (Vic).
In simple terms, it is a targeted investigation that helps determine one key question:
Do you legally need a Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP) for your proposed activity?
PAHTs can be prepared by individuals however assistance from a registered Heritage Advisor or Registered Aboriginal Party is required to access the Victorian Aboriginal Heritage Register. A completed PAHT is then submitted to the Secretary of the Department of Premier and Cabinet, through First Peoples – State Relations (FPSR), for review.
If the PAHT is certified, it provides a statutory exemption from preparing a CHMP. That exemption can then be used as part of your planning permit or approval process.
Why the PAHT exists?
The PAHT was introduced to bring certainty and consistency to a process that was previously unclear.
Before PAHTs existed, many projects relied on informal “due diligence” heritage assessments. These were unregulated, meaning quality and reliability varied significantly.
The PAHT replaces this with a formal, regulated, and legally binding process, where the final decision sits with the Secretary rather than being an informal professional opinion.
In short:
- Due diligence = expert opinion (unregulated)
- PAHT = formal legal determination (regulated and binding if certified)
A PAHT is governed under Sections 49B and 49C of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 and the Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2018.
When should you use a PAHT?
A PAHT is not needed for every project. It is only useful where there is real uncertainty about whether a CHMP is required.
It is mainly used in two situations. These are detailed below.
When should you use a PAHT?
Scenario 1: You believe the land has already been significantly disturbed
Scenario 2: Uncertainty about whether your activity is a “high impact activity”
Scenario 2: Uncertainty about whether your activity is a “high impact activity”
This is the most common reason to prepare a PAHT.
A CHMP is generally not required if the entire part of your site that lies within an area of cultural heritage sensitivity has already been subject to Significant Ground Disturbance (SGD).
What is Significant Ground Disturbance?
Under the Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2018, SGD means the soil or surface rock has been heavily disturbed by machinery such as: excavation; grading; digging; dredging or deep ripping.
The key idea is simple - If the ground has already been heavily worked by machinery, it is unlikely that intact Aboriginal cultural heritage remains in that location. Because a CHMP is designed to protect heritage before it is disturbed, it is not required where that disturbance has already permanently occurred.
The word entire is critical. A PAHT can only be certified on SGD grounds if all mapped culturally sensitive land within the activity area has been disturbed. If even a portion remains undisturbed, a CHMP will still be required for that part.
What evidence is needed to prove SGD?
The responsibility lies with the project sponsor (the applicant) to demonstrate SGD.
Stronger evidence includes:
- Historical aerial imagery showing earthworks or development
- Geotechnical investigations (e.g. bore logs, soil testing)
- Engineering or planning records showing past works
- Field assessment by a Heritage Advisor
The strongest submissions typically combine historical aerial imagery with geotechnical evidence.
Scenario 2: Uncertainty about whether your activity is a “high impact activity”
Scenario 2: Uncertainty about whether your activity is a “high impact activity”
Scenario 2: Uncertainty about whether your activity is a “high impact activity”
A second, less common but increasingly important use of a PAHT is where there is genuine uncertainty about whether a proposed activity is classified as a “high impact activity” under the Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2018.
This classification matters because a Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP) is only required if both of the following apply:
- the land is in an area of cultural heritage sensitivity, and
- the proposed activity is a high impact activity
If either condition is not met, a CHMP is not required.
Why uncertainty arises?
In practice, the boundary between high impact and non-high impact activities is not always straightforward. In these situations, different interpretations of the Regulations may reasonably lead to different conclusions about whether a CHMP is triggered.
Role of the PAHT
When used for high impact uncertainty, the PAHT is not just confirming facts on the ground. Instead, it is asking a legal-technical question.
This involves careful interpretation of:
- the nature of the proposed works
- how the works are staged or delivered
- the extent of ground disturbance involved
- how the activity is classified under the Regulations (not just how it is described in planning terms).
Because of this, outcomes often depend on both technical interpretation of the Regulations, and the level of detail and certainty in the project description.
For this reason, PAHTs in this category carry an inherently higher level of uncertainty than SGD-based applications.