WPCZ 2MBVRKZ3|j 7jC:,yoXj\  P6G;XP"i~'^:DPddDDDdp4D48dddddddddd88pppX|pDL|pp||D8D\dDXdXdXDdd88d8ddddDL8ddddX`(`lD4l\DDD4DDDDDDDDd8XXXXXX|X|X|X|XD8D8D8D8ddddddddddXdbdddpdXXXXXlX~|X|X|X|XdddldldD8DdDDDdplld|8|P|D|D|8dvddddDDDpLpLpLpl|T|8|\ddddddl|X|X|Xd|DdpL|Dd~4ddC$CWddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddNHxxH\dDXddddd8@d<@d<DDXXdDDxddzHxxHvppDXd<"dxtldpxxdHP LaserJet 4HPLAS4.PRSXj\  P6G;\fRpXP2yEK Z X-#XP\  P6QyoXP#3|j"i~'^09CSS999S]+9+/SSSSSSSSSS//]]]Ixnnxg]xx9?xgxx]xn]gxxxxg9/9MS9ISISI9SS//S/SSSS9?/SSxSSIP!PZ9+ZM999+99999999S/xIxIxIxIxIlnIgIgIgIgI9/9/9/9/xSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxIxSxRxSxSxS]SxIxIxInInInZnIxigIgIgIgIxSxSxSxZxSxZxS9/9S999Su]ZZxSg/gCg9g9g/xSbxSxSxSxSxn9n9n9]?]?]?]ZgFg/gMxSxSxSxSxSxSxxZgIgIgIxSg9xS]?g9xSi+SS88WuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddN>E?~E@iOGheader=Ax 4 <D  #FxX  Pg9CXP# reference>;#FxX  Pg9CXP#itemizeX1?&V 8F ` hp xr#FxX  Pg9CXP#header2@I ` hp x`    #FxX  Pg9CXP# 2-PA^HBOHJKKKMheading 3AF` hp x #FxX  Pg9CXP# footer!B!!#d\  PCP#"i~'^:DTddDDDd4D48ddddddddddDDd||||DXp||dp||ppL8LTdDddXdX8dd88X8ddddLL8dXXXLP8PlD4lTDDD4DDDDDDdDd8|d|d|d|d|dX|X|X|X|XD8D8D8D8dddddddddpX|ddddpXd|d|d|d|dXXlXx|X|X|X|XdddldldD8DdDDDddllXp8pHpDp@p8dtdddd|L|L|LdLdLdLllpHp8pTddddddplpLpLpLdpDddLpDpdx4ddC,CWddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddNHxxHhdLdddddd8@d<@d<DDppdDDxddzHxxHkddDpd<"dxtldxxd"i~'^#)0<8HH"&H>XHH8HB8>HH^HH>"".2",2,2,"222N2222"&22H22,006"6."""""""""""2H,H,H,H,H,XAB,>,>,>,>,""""H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H,H2H1H2H2H282H,H,H,B,B,B6B,H?>,>,>,>,H2H2H2H6H2H6H2""2"""2F866H2>>(>">">H2;H2H2H2H2XHB"B"B"8&8&8&86>*>>.H2H2H2H2H2H2^HH6>,>,>,H2>"H28&>"H2?22!!WFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddN$<<$.2",2222`2 LL2 LL2L"",,2d""" 2  yO- xԍ Joint Petitioners Reconsideration Petition at 2, 8. They request that such revised payment program require  xno payments during the first year of the license, interest payments, only, during the second and third years, and  {OK- xhpayments amortizing both principal and remaining interest over the final four years of the program. Id. at 8 (citing previous Joint Petitioners' filing in this matter, "Petition for Extraordinary Relief," at 5 (filed Aug. 26, 1994)).> In  xsupport, they argue that (1) analyses of predicted and actual winning bid amounts demonstrate  xthat certain winning bidders that later defaulted drove up bid amounts at auction to "grossly  xinflated" levels, (2) the actions of the defaulters were not reasonably foreseeable, and the oral  xoutcry auction methodology left no time for "reasonable [bid] evaluation[s]," (3) the defaults have  xzleft gaps in coverage and disrupted plans for networking among systems, (4) the equipment  xmarket has not developed quickly enough, and (5) sources of financing have not materialized  X7-because of the state of the IVDS industry.y7 {O"-ԍ Id. at 25, 67 (citing previous Joint Petitioners' filing at 24).y   x7. We find that Joint Petitioners' arguments do not support the requested revisions in the  xinstallment payment program. Again, we believe that bidders must use due diligence prior to  x[auction and then, knowing their own financial limits and preauction license valuations, bid (or  xnot bid) accordingly. We believe this is a reasonable and rational approach regardless of the",-(-(ZZ"  xparticular auction methodology employed. We affirm that the actions of defaulters is not a valid  xargument for extending the payments of those who now believe that they bid too high. In  xaddition, we note that licensing of any new service includes inherent uncertainties about the  x/development of the service. In this connection, we consider equipment rollout timetables,  xsuccessful or unsuccessful startups, and gaps in service area coverage to be postauction events  xLthat, even if unanticipated, generally do not constitute sufficient grounds for revising licensee  Xv-payment obligations.&v {O- xԍ See, e.g., Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC 96367, 10 FCC Rcd 12153 (1995), recon. denied,  {O- xMemorandum Opinion and Order, FCC 96271, 11 FCC Rcd 8210 (1996) (denying requests for waiver of "down  xpayment" rule). We note, however, that our rules provide for "grace periods" of three to six months, upon a requisite  {OK -showing of need. See 47 C.F.R.  1.2110(e)(4)(ii).  We therefore deny Joint Petitioners' request.Zv {O - xԍ In light of our determination, we need not address Joint Petitioners' associated request, see Joint Petitioners Reconsideration Petition at 6 n.11, that we waive Section 1.2110(e)(3)(ii) of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.2110(e)(3)(ii), to permit license payments to extend beyond the IVDS license term of five years.   WH< x2. Frequency of Installment Payments    x8. IVDS licensees eligible to pay for their licenses through installments can make interest X - x/only payments during the first two years of their installment payment plan.  {O-ԍ 47 C.F.R.  1.2110(e)(3)(iii) (formerly 47 C.F.R.  1.2110(d)(3)(iii)); Second Report and Order, 9 FCC  {OV-Rcd at 2391; see also 47 C.F.R.  95.816(d); Fourth Report and Order, 9 FCC Rcd at 2340 n.90. Dunbar et al.  x.request that they be permitted to pay the first two years of installment payments on an annual  X - xbasis.b 4  {O-ԍ Dunbar et al. Petition for Reconsideration at 47.b In addressing this issue in the Order we described how, following Administrative  xProcedure Act (APA) "notice and comment" procedures, we adopted Section 1.2110(e)(3) of our  X - xrules.F  yO"-ԍ 47 C.F.R.  1.2110(e)(3).F Section 1.2110(e)(3) states that "[u]pon grant of the license, the Commission will notify  X-each eligible licensee of the terms of its installment payment plan,"vV  {O-ԍ Order, 11 FCC Rcd at 1284 (quoting 47 C.F.R.  1.2110(e)(3)).v and continues that  ` ` Such plans will:  XO-  X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8: