It’s undeniable that lead is a serious health concern in the United States with much of it originating from the millions of lead pipes carrying drinking water to users everywhere.

Many of us became significantly more in tune with the concern when national news coverage reported on the Flint, Michigan water crisis in 2016 after the then-governor declared a State of Emergency and launched an investigation into high lead levels there. It was determined the problem originated largely from the city’s 2014 water source switch.

While this problem was not new, the public turned more attention to the crisis, and suddenly, communities everywhere became more focused on testing and lead safety.

Let’s face it: infrastructure, including utility lines in America, are old, and it is extremely time-consuming and costly first, to pinpoint which pipes are lead, and then, to replace them.

Soon, that may no longer be an option.

Under strict new rules proposed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. cities would be required to replace their water pipes within 10 years in order to reduce lead in drinking water. The Biden administration previously said it wants all of the nation’s roughly 9 million lead pipes to be removed — swiftly. Lead pipes connect water mains in the street to homes and are typically the biggest source of lead in drinking water.

Sure, it all sounds logical — and then reality sets in. If every lead pipe in America must be dug up and replaced within a decade, where will all the new infrastructure come from? Also, many aging, underground pipes are lead, but many are not. How can utility companies and municipalities possibly be expected to know the difference before they actually start digging? And, of course, how on earth can small communities afford the costs that will come with this massive project?

Adding even more challenges to this largely overzealous proposal is that it would require lead pipes to be replaced, even when the lead levels don’t measure too high. And now the EPA wants to lower the level of lead at which utilities are forced to take action. Federal officials are pushing the cities to do a better job informing the public when elevated lead levels are found.

And then there is the fact that some water lines on private property, owned by the homeowner, never may be changed.

We propose that a slower, more measured approach to this serious problem may be the right answer.

Require communities, first, to locate and map their lead water lines. Then start tackling the problem piece by piece. Perhaps set more manageable goals for removal of specific percentages of the lead lines by reasonable deadlines.

Why not pick up where the Trump administration left off? The goal then was to focus more on testing day-care centers and schools. We see that as reasonable locations to start.

Require states, who hope to obtain federal funds to tackle the problem, to more stringently enforce these efforts.

The fact is, this crisis did not arise overnight, and it will not be solved overnight. Correction will be a lengthy process that can be tackled, but only over time.

And, at the end of the day, federal funds must be contributed to correcting this crisis.