Contentiousness is in the air today as groups representing emergency responders and the Federal Communications Commission prepare to tell Congress why the other shouldn’t control of a key piece of the wireless broadband spectrum.

At issue is a new block of the spectrum—often referred to as the D Block—that the FCC is attempting to auction to private communication companies, according to a New York Times article. The FCC is hoping to capitalize on wireless providers looking for bandwidth to support the next generation of mobile technology. Public safety officials, however, were hoping to expand into the D Block—right next door to their existing spectrum space—and create a network dedicated to public safety use.

Although the pressing need to create an interoperable network for emergency response is generally agreed upon, the FCC holds that dedicating the D Block to public safety isn’t necessarily the answer. A white paper issued by the Commission this month states there is already more than enough bandwidth dedicated to public safety for daily operations and the boost given by the block would do little to meet responder needs in worst-case scenarios. The paper goes on to indicate response agencies could make more efficient use of their existing spectrum.

The Commission supports auctioning the D Block—the proceeds of which would go towards the estimated $6.5 billion cost of building the block—and allowing emergency communications to supersede other uses when necessary, according to a Politico article. A bill before the House Subcommittee on Communications, Technology and the Internet today will discuss setting aside funds for a private bidder to eventually build and operate the dedicated network elsewhere on the spectrum.

“This plan is like providing public safety with its own expandable, high speed lane, and it is a cost-effective investment in a national asset,” the article quoted FCC Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau Chief Jamie Barnett as saying. “Merely allocating an additional 10 MHz to public safety would be like building a separate, stand-alone highway system, and one so expensive that it would not even reach every community in America for years.”

Still public safety officials say they need that stand-alone highway to make sure they don’t caught in traffic while trying to respond to emergencies and disasters, according to the Public Safety Alliance, a group formed specifically to address matters related to building a dedicated wireless response network. They contend that responders will face holes in coverage, even when given priority on the network, and that public safety experts need to be in control of their communications.

“It’s got to be a system that is run by public safety,” former FEMA director and Alliance founder R. David Paulison told Politico. “We’re selling our souls and the future of our first responders.”

The push and pull between the two groups might not be the only issue driving the debate, however. There are indications that large telecommunications companies might be trying to throw the match, according Bloomberg Businessweek. By throwing their hats and wallets into the ring with the Public Safety Alliance—whose membership is made up of organizations such as the International Association of Fire Chiefs, the National Sheriffs' Association, the Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials, and others—AT&T and Verizon Wireless could be trying to remove the new spectrum from the auction block, leaving smaller competitors at a disadvantage.

“This is all about AT&T and Verizon trying to keep their spectrum advantage,” the magazine quoted Public Knowledge legal director Harold Feld as saying.

While not denying the affinity, Verizon spokesman Jeffrey Nelson pointed out that the groups are naturally allied by a common frustration—communication break down, especially when it’s needed most.

“We’re saying what public safety says,” Nelson said. “This has been a mess for far too long.”