By Rory D. Sweeney

A Wyoming federal judge’s ruling last week striking down the Obama administration’s regulations on fracking on federal lands will save operators about $113,000 per well, according to an industry-sponsored analysis.

The study, which was performed by John Dunham & Associates at the request of the Western Energy Alliance, found that the regulations by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management would have added at least $403 million annually to well development costs.

The regulations would have affected several thousand wells each year on federal and Indian lands, either as new drilling or maintenance of existing wells. The majority of the lands are in western states and the Gulf of Mexico.

Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, North Dakota and the Ute Indian Tribe challenged the regulations in a case that was combined with a separate suit by WEA and the Independent Petroleum Association of America.

The regulations, which were to take effect in June 2015, were stayed pending the outcome of the case.

While the breakdown between oil and gas wells was unclear because federal statistics don’t separate them, U.S. Energy Information Administration data show that the average cost to develop a natural gas well has been steadily rising to more than $600/foot as of 2007, which is the most recent information the agency provides. EIA reported the average total well cost at nearly $4 million.

In his ruling, U.S. District Judge Scott Skavdahl explicitly avoided the question of whether or not the regulations are necessary and instead focused entirely on BLM’s authority to enact them (Case Nos. 2:15-CV-043-SWS, 2:15-CV-041-SWS).

Dismissing the agency’s arguments that it has jurisdiction through several tangential regulations, Skavdahl searched for specific delineation of authority from Congress. He found that the Safe Drinking Water Act requires EPA to adopt requirements for state programs to prevent underground injection from threatening drinking water sources.

He also cited the Energy Policy Act of 2005, which expressly excluded federal oversight of fracking that doesn’t involve diesel fuel.

Skavdahl rejected BLM’s argument that the generalized authority the agency cited would supersede the more specific SWDA and EPACT.

“Given Congress’ enactment of the [Energy Policy] Act of 2005, to nonetheless conclude that Congress implicitly delegated BLM authority to regulate hydraulic fracturing lacks common sense,” he wrote. “Congress’ inability or unwillingness to pass a law desired by the executive branch does not default authority to the executive branch to act independently, regardless of whether hydraulic fracturing is good or bad for the environment.”

The administration filed an appeal on Friday. “We believe that we have a strong argument to make about the important role that the federal government can play in ensuring that hydraulic fracturing that’s done on public land doesn’t threaten the drinking water of the people who live in the area,” White House spokesman Josh Earnest said during a press briefing on Wednesday.