The Environmental Protection Agency is promising to erase a scientific finding that underpins climate regulations nationwide. But some business leaders said they are wary that the move could lead to a costly legal quagmire.

The rule, known as the “endangerment finding,” is the conclusion by the EPA that greenhouse gases endanger public health and therefore must be regulated by the federal government. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin has said the agency would repeal the 2009 finding, contending that the burden to industries of cutting greenhouse gas emissions is more harmful than a warming planet.

Yet carmakers, electric utilities, and even the oil and gas industry have asked the EPA to tread carefully. If the federal government were to stop regulating greenhouse gases, the primary driver of climate change for more than half a century, it could clear the way for states and municipalities to sue companies for damages from climate change. It could spur individual states to come up with their own pollution limits, creating a patchwork of rules. Environmental groups have vowed to sue the EPA if it repeals the finding, leading to more business uncertainty.

“This is something that the vast majority of industry didn’t ask for and doesn’t want,” said Zach Friedman, senior director of federal policy at Ceres, a nonprofit group that submitted a letter from 59 companies and investors opposing the EPA plan.

Brigit Hirsch, an EPA spokesperson, said rescinding the endangerment finding would “unlock regulatory clarity like never before” and the finding had led to heavy costs, particularly for the auto industry.

In its proposal to repeal the endangerment finding, the EPA cited a Energy Department report that downplayed the severity of climate change. That report was written by five prominent climate contrarians chosen by the Trump administration. Their work has been sharply criticized by many climate scientists.

Few business leaders raised the threat of climate change in their opposition to the EPA plan, and many argued for loosened emissions standards. But they still said the federal government should retain the ability to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.