Madam Chair, I'd offer that one of the other central tenets of this legislation is vessel owner responsibility. Vessel owners bear the responsibility for their vessels and, where possible and when possible, should be compelled to take immediate action before the federal government intervenes. Most vessel owners are responsible, and changing “may” to “must” removes the possibility of having those vessel owners manage their vessels appropriately.
The amendment could have the effect of the government stepping in to take action in every case, before the vessel owner has had a chance to take the appropriate action. It could also send the wrong message, I'd suggest that when the federal government is obligated to intervene, it signals that the responsibility is on the federal government alone.
As I mentioned, one of the central tenets of this legislation is vessel owner responsibility for the entire life cycle of the vessel.