After almost two years of studying a single rebanding plan designed to address interference at 800 MHz, the Federal Communications Commission recently received two new proposals in consecutive business days.

Both submittals include components that indicate all interested parties are coming closer to an agreement. While it's good the FCC now has more options before it, giving regulators choices means deliberation, so don't expect an order for weeks.

On the surface, that has to be discouraging to public-safety officials, who have been hearing for months that the FCC was on the verge of making a decision. But public safety should be encouraged that the latest proposals offer a chance -- albeit a slim one -- that the FCC might be able to come up with something that could result in rebanding being completed quicker than it would have if the Consensus Plan had been adopted a couple of months ago.

Remember, an order that lands in court does little for public safety, which likely would get no relief from 800 MHz interference during the couple of years the judicial system would spend deciding whether the FCC can award spectrum without an auction, as is called for in the Consensus Plan. If a court ruled against the FCC on the matter -- and it's very possible -- we're back to square one.

Keeping this out of court is crucial, and it didn't seem possible as long as Verizon Wireless and CTIA continued to maintain they would litigate any spectrum award to Nextel. But both groups backed off that stance last week, acknowledging they would not take an award of 2.1 GHz spectrum to court (they also all but abandoned their previous position that technical remedies could solve the problem).

Of course, Nextel doesn't want 2.1 GHz airwaves, because they would be too costly to use -- so much so, that the carrier turned around the next business day and announced its willingness to shell out an additional $500 million to relocate broadcasters from the 1.9 GHz spectrum it covets. That would free up an additional 10 MHz of spectrum in that band the FCC could then auction.

True, there's still no clear agreement -- Verizon implies it may litigate an award of 1.9 GHz spectrum, and Nextel cites its shareholders' interests as the reason for opposing 2.1 GHz airwaves. But this is progress, because the parties finally are acknowledging publicly that the debate is not about finding the best way to help public safety--everyone agrees on the need for that--or maintaining the sanctity of spectrum auction laws.

It's about money. Public safety doesn't want to pay any; Congress would like to get some from a spectrum auction to help the budget; Nextel wants to spend as little as possible to enter the high-speed wireless data market; and Verizon/CTIA want to make sure Nextel doesn't get to enter that high-stakes game with a penny ante.

The FCC is left with the responsibility of trying to "thread the needle," as one analyst put it, by issuing an order that will appease all parties.

It won't be easy. Should the FCC award 2.1 GHz spectrum to Nextel, it would limit the legal challenges to an order. However, because there's no equipment ready made for 2.1 GHz, there's no question that the spectrum is less valuable than 1.9 GHz airwaves. Would it be valuable enough for Nextel to cover the entire cost of rebanding? That's questionable.

Should the FCC choose to award Nextel spectrum at 1.9 GHz, there should be plenty of money to reband 800 MHz and relocate broadcasters from 1.9 GHz (an aside -- wouldn't it be nice if the same could said for 700 MHz?), opening a new auction opportunity. But that opens the door to litigation from Verizon, the one cellular competitor in a position to take such action.

For Nextel, it comes down to a difficult choice: Pay big money ($3 billion to $5 billion) for 1.9 MHz spectrum, knowing that affordable equipment is readily available but that litigation would delay -- perhaps negate -- the buildout of the high-speed network it covets; or, accept the award of 2.1 GHz spectrum that calls for less upfront cost and little legal risk, knowing that equipment choices for a high-speed data network would be limited, delayed and ultimately much more expensive.

Nobody knows how this will turn out, but it promises to be interesting. Let's just hope no first responders or civilians are killed or seriously injured while policymakers try to figure it out.

E-mail me at djackson@primediabusiness.com.