Business Uninterrupted Monetary Program Act of 2025
- Sponsor
- Rep. Correa, J. Luis [D-CA-46]
- Committees
- Transportation and Infrastructure Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jul 24, 2025
Bottom line
The bill requires major federal transit and highway projects to set aside funds to compensate local businesses and nonprofits for financial losses due to construction-related disruptions.
What it actually does
This bill mandates that recipients of certain federal transit and highway grants establish a "Business Uninterrupted Monetary Program Fund" (BUMP Fund). These funds are designed to compensate private businesses and nonprofit organizations for measurable negative financial impacts caused by interruptions during large-scale transportation projects. It also creates a one-time competitive grant program to provide similar relief for eligible ongoing transit projects that began construction after October 2018.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue this bill protects small businesses and nonprofits from bearing the financial brunt of necessary infrastructure development, ensuring community stability during construction. It provides a dedicated, transparent mechanism for compensation, reducing economic hardship, fostering better community relations, and ensuring that the benefits of infrastructure are not outweighed by localized costs.
Opponents contend
Opponents might argue that this mandate adds another layer of bureaucracy and cost to already expensive infrastructure projects, potentially delaying them or reducing the number of projects that can be undertaken. They might also raise concerns about the potential for fraudulent claims or the difficulty in accurately assessing "measurable negative impacts" and administering the funds efficiently.
The bill is relatively short and its core provisions are clearly articulated, making it accessible for a quick review, though understanding its integration into existing code sections requires some familiarity with transportation law.
Section 2, amending 49 U.S.C. 5309
Mandatory Business Uninterrupted Monetary Program Fund for Transit Projects
This provision requires project sponsors receiving fixed guideway capital investment grants for projects with a total cost of $100 million or more to establish a Business Uninterrupted Monetary Program Fund (BUMP Fund). This fund is specifically for compensating private businesses and nonprofit organizations that experience negative financial impacts due to interruptions caused by the project. Contributions to the BUMP Fund can count towards the non-Federal share of the project cost, but cannot exceed 10% of that share and must reflect estimated damages.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that this provision ensures local businesses, often disproportionately affected by long-term construction, receive necessary financial support, fostering economic resilience and community goodwill. It provides a dedicated, predictable mechanism for compensation, reducing economic hardship and potential business failures.
Critics contend
Critics may contend that this adds a new financial burden and administrative complexity to large transit projects, potentially increasing overall project costs or diverting funds from core infrastructure development. Concerns could also be raised about the difficulty in accurately assessing 'measurable negative impacts' and the potential for disputes.
Tradeoffs
This provision balances the societal need for major infrastructure development with the economic protection of local businesses and nonprofits. It potentially increases project costs and administrative overhead in exchange for reduced local economic disruption and enhanced community support for projects.
Section 2, amending 49 U.S.C. 5309(s)(3)(B)
Secretary's Discretionary Waiver for BUMP Fund Requirements
This provision grants the Secretary of Transportation the authority to waive or alter the required BUMP Fund contribution amount. Such waivers can be granted if the project sponsor already has an equivalent program in place, if the Secretary determines no interruption could occur, if federal funding for the project is less than 10% of the total cost, or for any other reason deemed appropriate by the Secretary.
Section 2, amending 49 U.S.C. 5309(s)(4)-(5)
BUMP Fund Eligibility Criteria and Eligible Expenses
This section outlines the detailed information project sponsors must provide to the Secretary regarding their BUMP Fund's implementation. This includes how eligible 'covered entities' (private businesses or nonprofits) will be determined, the terms for receiving funds, the process for assessing impacts and distributing funds, the total funding available per entity, and outreach plans. Eligible expenses for compensation include utilities, insurance, rent/mortgage, payroll, and loss of income, with the Secretary retaining the authority to disqualify any expense deemed inconsistent with the section's requirements.
Section 3, amending 23 U.S.C. Chapter 1 by adding Section 180
Mandatory Business Uninterrupted Monetary Program Fund for Highway Projects
This provision extends the BUMP Fund requirement to recipients of Federal-aid highway funds for projects with a total cost of $50 million or greater. Similar to the transit provisions, this fund is intended to compensate covered entities (private businesses or nonprofits) for negative financial impacts resulting from interruptions caused by the highway project. Contributions to the BUMP Fund can count towards the non-Federal share, but cannot exceed 25% of that share and must reflect estimated damages.
Section 4
One-Time Competitive Grant Program for Ongoing Transit Projects
This section establishes a competitive grant program, to be created within 270 days of the Act's enactment, offering a single round of grants. These grants, capped at $10 million each, are available to project sponsors of fixed guideway capital investment projects that began construction on or after October 1, 2018, and were still under construction as of June 1, 2023. The purpose is to provide immediate relief to covered entities impacted by these ongoing projects, mirroring the intent of the new BUMP Fund requirements.
This provision specifies that funds dedicated to a BUMP Fund may be derived from non-Federal funds (unless prohibited by an agreement) or from Federal funds, if approved by the Secretary.
Section 2, 49 U.S.C. 5309(s)(9)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for specifying funding sources and flexibility, often placed in technical or miscellaneous provisions.
Case for: Supporters would argue this provides crucial flexibility for project sponsors to meet the BUMP Fund requirement, potentially easing the financial burden on local entities by allowing federal funds to contribute, especially for projects with limited non-Federal matching capabilities.
Case against: Critics might contend that allowing federal funds to contribute to the BUMP Fund could be seen as diverting federal infrastructure dollars from direct construction to compensation, potentially increasing the overall federal outlay for a project without clear limits or justification.
Estimated impact: Could significantly alter the true federal cost share of projects, depending on how often and under what circumstances the Secretary approves the use of federal funds for BUMP contributions.
For any covered highway project that is funded with 100 percent Federal funds, the Secretary shall determine, together with the project sponsor, an appropriate amount of funding for the BUMP Fund.
Section 3, 23 U.S.C. 180(a)(9)
Why it matters:It is a necessary clarification for a specific funding scenario, ensuring the BUMP Fund mandate applies universally, even when the standard non-Federal share calculation is inapplicable.
Case for: Supporters would argue this provision is essential to ensure that the protections of the BUMP Fund apply even to projects that are entirely federally funded, preventing a loophole where businesses impacted by such projects would be left without compensation.
Case against: Critics might contend that this provision gives the Secretary significant discretion over federal funds without clear legislative guidance on the amount, potentially leading to inconsistent application or an arbitrary determination of the BUMP Fund size for these projects.
Estimated impact: Applies to a subset of highway projects, but for those projects, it ensures the BUMP Fund is still established, potentially increasing federal costs for projects that would otherwise have no local contribution to the fund.
These provisions outline how any unused funds remaining in a BUMP Fund after the project's completion and a 1-year retention period may be utilized. Permissible uses include operating expenses for the project, project enhancements or construction cost overruns, other eligible projects under the same title (though not as non-Federal matching funds), return to the initial grant recipient, or any other purpose approved by the Secretary.
Section 2, 49 U.S.C. 5309(s)(8) and Section 3, 23 U.S.C. 180(a)(7)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for specifying the disposition of unspent funds, ensuring financial accountability and flexibility in resource management.
Case for: Supporters would argue that this provides practical flexibility for project sponsors to utilize unspent funds for other legitimate project-related needs, preventing funds from being locked up unnecessarily or returned to the Treasury when other needs exist.
Case against: Critics might argue that this creates a potential incentive for project sponsors to overestimate BUMP Fund needs, knowing that excess funds can be repurposed for other project overruns or enhancements, potentially diverting funds from their original compensatory purpose.
Estimated impact: Could result in significant amounts of funds being repurposed for other project needs, depending on the accuracy of initial BUMP Fund estimates and the extent of actual business impacts.