[guided]This is the delicate point in the proof: current convergence alone is not enough to pass from a flat blow-up to small excess, because integral currents can converge with cancellation. We therefore invoke the flat-tangent-cone regularity theorem for codimension-one area-minimizing integral currents, whose proof combines monotonicity, lower semicontinuity of mass, the constancy of density for the limiting flat cone, and Allard-type excess improvement.
We verify the theorem's hypotheses one by one. The current $T$ is an integral $2$-current and is area minimizing in $U$ by the theorem statement. The first step produced a radius $r_0>0$ such that $B(x_0,r_0)\subset U$, $\partial(T\llcorner B(x_0,r))=0$ in $B(x_0,r)$ for every $0<r<r_0$, and the restrictions remain area minimizing for compactly supported competitors. The tangent-cone step produced an oriented plane $P\subset\mathbb R^3$ and an integer $q\geq 1$ such that one tangent cone at $x_0$ is
\begin{align*}
C=q[[P]].
\end{align*}
Thus the input data match the theorem exactly: an integral area minimizer, no interior boundary, and a multiplicity-$q$ flat tangent cone.
The theorem's quantitative content is stronger than ordinary current convergence. It asserts that area minimality prevents mass cancellation in the blow-up sequence and yields convergence of the associated mass measures to the mass measure of $q[[P]]$. Consequently, after passing to a sufficiently small physical scale, the mass ratio is within the required tolerance of $q$, the height excess over $P$ is small, the tilt excess relative to $P$ is small, the generalized mean curvature is zero because the current is area minimizing, and there is no boundary in the ball. These are precisely the density, mass-ratio, height/excess, stationarity, mean-curvature, and no-boundary hypotheses used in the multiplicity-$q$ Allard regularity conclusion.
The conclusion is not merely that the support is graphical as a varifold. The integral-current version identifies the current itself. Hence there exist $0<r_1<r_0$, an open set $V\subset P$, a number $\alpha\in(0,1)$, and a $C^{1,\alpha}$ map
\begin{align*}
f: V &\to P^\perp
\end{align*}
such that
\begin{align*}
\Sigma_1:=\{z+f(z):z\in V\}
\end{align*}
is an embedded $C^{1,\alpha}$ surface, relatively closed in $B(x_0,r_1)$ and without boundary in $B(x_0,r_1)$, and the current is exactly
\begin{align*}
T\llcorner B(x_0,r_1)=q[[\Sigma_1]].
\end{align*}
The orientation on $\Sigma_1$ is the one transported from the oriented plane $P$ by the graph parametrization $z\mapsto z+f(z)$, so the notation $[[\Sigma_1]]$ is an integral current, not just a set-theoretic support.[/guided]