SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2011
SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Policies) [Abstract]
SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES	NOTE 2 -SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES Derivative Financial Instruments-As part of its asset and liability management strategy, the Company uses derivative financial instruments to mitigate exposure to interest rate and foreign currency risks. All derivative instruments, including certain derivative instruments embedded in other contracts, are recognized on the condensed consolidated balance sheet at fair value with the change in fair value reported in earnings. When master netting agreements exist, the Company nets counterparty positions with any cash collateral received or delivered. The Company's interest rate swaps on certain certificates of deposit qualify for hedge accounting treatment under ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging. The Company documents its hedge relationships, including identification of the hedging instruments and the hedged items, as well as its risk management objectives and strategies for undertaking the hedge transaction at the time the derivative contract is executed. This includes designating the derivative contract as a "fair value hedge" which is a hedge of a recognized asset or liability. All derivatives designated as fair value hedges are linked to specific hedged items or to groups of specific assets and liabilities on the balance sheet. Both at inception and quarterly thereafter, the Company assesses whether the derivatives used in hedging transactions are highly effective (as defined in the guidance) in offsetting changes in the fair value of the hedged item. Retroactive effectiveness is also assessed as well as the continued expectation that the hedge will remain effective prospectively. Any ineffective portion of the changes of fair value hedges is recognized immediately in interest expense in the condensed consolidated statements of income. The Company discontinues hedge accounting prospectively when (i) a derivative is no longer highly effective in offsetting changes in the fair value, (ii) a derivative expires or is sold, terminated, or exercised, or (iii) the Company determines that designation of a derivative as a hedge is no longer appropriate. If a fair value hedge derivative instrument is terminated or the hedge designation removed, the previous adjustments to the carrying amount of the hedged liability would be subsequently accounted for in the same manner as other components of the carrying amount of that liability. For interest-bearing liabilities, such adjustments would be amortized into earnings over the remaining life of the respective liability. Troubled debt restructurings (“TDR”)- A loan is identified as a troubled debt restructure when a borrower is experiencing financial difficulties and for economic or legal reasons related to these difficulties the Company grants a concession to the borrower in the restructuring that it would not otherwise consider. The Company has granted a concession when, as a result of the restructuring, it does not expect to collect all amounts due, including principal and/or interest accrued at the original terms of the loan. The concessions may be granted in various forms, including a below-market change in the stated interest rate, a reduction in the loan balance or accrued interest, an extension of the maturity date, or a note split with principal forgiveness. A restructuring executed at an interest rate that is at or near market interest rates for nontroubled debt is not a TDR. All troubled debt restructurings are reviewed for potential impairment. For modifications where we forgive principal, the entire amount of such principal forgiveness is immediately charged off. Generally, a nonaccrual loan that is restructured remains on nonaccrual status for a period of six months to demonstrate that the borrower can perform under the restructured terms. However, the borrower's performance prior to the restructuring, or other significant events at the time of restructuring may be considered in assessing whether the borrower can meet the new terms and may result in the loan remaining on accrual status or being returned to accrual status after a shorter performance period. If the borrower's performance under the new terms is not reasonably assured, the loan remains classified as a nonaccrual loan. Loans classified as TDRs are reported as impaired loans. Recent Accounting Standards In January 2010, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2010-06, Improving Disclosures About Fair Value Measurements. ASU 2010-06 requires separate disclosure of the amounts of significant transfers in and out of Level 1 and Level 2 fair value measurements and reasons for the transfers and separate presentation of information about purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements in the reconciliation for Level 3 fair value measurements. Additionally, ASU 2010-06 clarifies existing disclosures regarding level of disaggregation and inputs and valuation techniques. The new disclosures and clarifications of existing disclosures under ASU 2010-06 are effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2009, except for the disclosures about purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements in the roll forward of activity in Level 3 fair value measurements which are effective for fiscal years ending after December 15, 2010 and for interim periods within those fiscal years. The adoption of the disclosure requirements did not have a material effect on the Company's condensed consolidated financial statements. In December 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-28, Intangibles-Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): When to Perform Step 2 of the Goodwill Impairment Test for Reporting Units with Zero or Negative Carrying Amounts, which modifies Step 1 of the goodwill impairment test for reporting units with zero or negative carrying amounts. For those reporting units, an entity is required to perform Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test if it is more likely than not that a goodwill impairment exists. In determining whether it is more likely than not that a goodwill impairment exists, an entity should also consider whether there are any adverse qualitative factors indicating that an impairment may exist. The amendments in ASU 2010-28 are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2010 and for interim periods within those fiscal years. Upon adoption of the amendments, any resulting goodwill impairment should be recorded as a cumulative-effect adjustment to beginning retained earnings in the period of adoption. Any goodwill impairments occurring after the initial adoption of the amendments should be included in earnings. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material effect on the Company's condensed consolidated financial statements. In December 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-29, Business Combinations (Topic 805): Disclosure of Supplementary Pro Forma Information for Business Combinations, which specifies that if a public entity presents comparative financials, the entity should disclose revenue and earnings of the combined entity as though the business combination(s) that occurred during the current year had occurred as of the beginning of the comparable prior annual reporting period only. ASU 2010-29 also expands the supplemental pro forma disclosures to include a description of the nature and amount of material, nonrecurring pro forma adjustments directly attributable to the business combination included in the reported pro forma revenue and earnings. The amendments in ASU 2010-29 are effective prospectively for business combinations for which the acquisition date is on or after the beginning of the first annual reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2010. Early adoption is permitted. The adoption of the disclosure requirements did not have a material effect on the Company's condensed consolidated financial statements. In April 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-02, Receivables (Topic 310) A Creditor's Determination of Whether a Restructuring Is a Troubled Debt Restructuring. ASU 2011-02 clarifies the guidance on the two conditions that must exist in evaluating whether a restructuring constitutes a troubled debt restructuring: that the restructuring constitutes a concession and that the debtor is experiencing financial difficulties. In addition, ASU 2011-02 clarifies that a creditor is precluded from using the effective interest rate test in the debtor's guidance on restructuring of payables (paragraph 470-60-55-10) when evaluating whether a restructuring constitutes a troubled debt restructuring. The amendments in ASU 2011-02 are effective for the first interim or annual period beginning on or after June 15, 2011, and should be applied retrospectively to the beginning of the annual period of adoption. Additionally, ASU 2011-02 finalizes the effective date for the disclosures required by paragraphs 310-10-50-33 through 50-34, which were deferred by ASU 2011-01, for interim and annual periods beginning on or after June 15, 2011. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material effect on the Company's condensed consolidated financial statements. In April 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-03, Transfers and Servicing (Topic 860): Reconsideration of Effective Control for Repurchase Agreements. ASU 2011-03 removes the transferor's ability criterion from the consideration of effective control for repos and other agreements that both entitle and obligate the transferor to repurchase or redeem financial assets before their maturity. The amendments in ASU 2011-03 remove from the assessment of effective control (1) the criterion requiring the transferor to have the ability to repurchase or redeem the financial assets on substantially the agreed terms, even in the event of default by the transferee, and (2) the collateral maintenance implementation guidance related to that criterion. The FASB indicates that eliminating the transferor's ability criterion and related implementation guidance from an entity's assessment of effective control should improve the accounting for repos and other similar transactions. The amendments in ASU 2011-03 are effective for the first interim or annual period beginning on or after December 15, 2011 and are to be applied prospectively to transactions or modifications of existing transactions that occur on or after the effective date. Early adoption is not permitted. The Company does not expect the adoption of this guidance to have a material effect on its condensed consolidated financial statements. In May 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-04, Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRSs. ASU 2011-04 addresses convergence between GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”) requirements for measurement of and disclosures about fair value. The amendments are not expected to have a significant impact on companies applying GAAP. Key provisions of the amendment include: a prohibition on grouping financial instruments for purposes of determining fair value, except when an entity manages market and credit risks on the basis of the entity's net exposure to the group; an extension of the prohibition against the use of a blockage factor to all fair value measurements (that prohibition currently applies only to financial instruments with quoted prices in active markets); and a requirement that for recurring Level 3 fair value measurements, entities disclose quantitative information about unobservable inputs, a description of the valuation process used and qualitative details about the sensitivity of the measurements. In addition, for items not carried at fair value but for which fair value is disclosed, entities will be required to disclose the level within the fair value hierarchy that applies to the fair value measurement disclosed. The amendments in ASU 2011-04 are effective during interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011. Early adoption is not permitted. The Company does not expect the adoption of this guidance to have a material effect on its condensed consolidated financial statements. In June 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-05, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Presentation of Comprehensive Income. ASU 2011-05 will require companies to present the components of net income and other comprehensive income either as one continuous statement or as two consecutive statements. It eliminates the option to present components of other comprehensive income as part of the statement of changes in stockholders' equity. The standard does not change the items which must be reported in other comprehensive income, how such items are measured, or when they must be reclassified to net income. This standard is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011. The Company does not expect the adoption of this guidance to have a material effect on its condensed consolidated financial statements. In September 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-08, Intangibles-Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Testing Goodwill for Impairment. ASU 2011-08 gives both public and nonpublic companies the option to qualitatively determine whether they can bypass the two-step goodwill impairment test under ASC 350-20, Intangibles – Goodwill and Other: Goodwill. Under ASU 2011-08, if a company chooses to perform a qualitative assessment and determines that it is more likely than not (a more than 50 percent likelihood) that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, it would then perform Step 1 of the annual goodwill impairment test in ASC 350-20 and, if necessary, proceed to Step 2. Otherwise, no further evaluation would be necessary. The amended guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011. Early adoption is permitted. The Company does not expect the adoption of this guidance to have a material effect on its condensed consolidated financial statements.

NOTE 2 -SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

Derivative Financial Instruments-As part of its asset and liability management strategy, the Company uses derivative financial instruments to mitigate exposure to interest rate and foreign currency risks. All derivative instruments, including certain derivative instruments embedded in other contracts, are recognized on the condensed consolidated balance sheet at fair value with the change in fair value reported in earnings. When master netting agreements exist, the Company nets counterparty positions with any cash collateral received or delivered.

The Company's interest rate swaps on certain certificates of deposit qualify for hedge accounting treatment under ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging. The Company documents its hedge relationships, including identification of the hedging instruments and the hedged items, as well as its risk management objectives and strategies for undertaking the hedge transaction at the time the derivative contract is executed. This includes designating the derivative contract as a "fair value hedge" which is a hedge of a recognized asset or liability. All derivatives designated as fair value hedges are linked to specific hedged items or to groups of specific assets and liabilities on the balance sheet. Both at inception and quarterly thereafter, the Company assesses whether the derivatives used in hedging transactions are highly effective (as defined in the guidance) in offsetting changes in the fair value of the hedged item. Retroactive effectiveness is also assessed as well as the continued expectation that the hedge will remain effective prospectively. Any ineffective portion of the changes of fair value hedges is recognized immediately in interest expense in the condensed consolidated statements of income.

The Company discontinues hedge accounting prospectively when (i) a derivative is no longer highly effective in offsetting changes in the fair value, (ii) a derivative expires or is sold, terminated, or exercised, or (iii) the Company determines that designation of a derivative as a hedge is no longer appropriate. If a fair value hedge derivative instrument is terminated or the hedge designation removed, the previous adjustments to the carrying amount of the hedged liability would be subsequently accounted for in the same manner as other components of the carrying amount of that liability. For interest-bearing liabilities, such adjustments would be amortized into earnings over the remaining life of the respective liability.

Troubled debt restructurings (“TDR”)- A loan is identified as a troubled debt restructure when a borrower is experiencing financial difficulties and for economic or legal reasons related to these difficulties the Company grants a concession to the borrower in the restructuring that it would not otherwise consider. The Company has granted a concession when, as a result of the restructuring, it does not expect to collect all amounts due, including principal and/or interest accrued at the original terms of the loan. The concessions may be granted in various forms, including a below-market change in the stated interest rate, a reduction in the loan balance or accrued interest, an extension of the maturity date, or a note split with principal forgiveness. A restructuring executed at an interest rate that is at or near market interest rates for nontroubled debt is not a TDR. All troubled debt restructurings are reviewed for potential impairment. For modifications where we forgive principal, the entire amount of such principal forgiveness is immediately charged off. Generally, a nonaccrual loan that is restructured remains on nonaccrual status for a period of six months to demonstrate that the borrower can perform under the restructured terms. However, the borrower's performance prior to the restructuring, or other significant events at the time of restructuring may be considered in assessing whether the borrower can meet the new terms and may result in the loan remaining on accrual status or being returned to accrual status after a shorter performance period. If the borrower's performance under the new terms is not reasonably assured, the loan remains classified as a nonaccrual loan. Loans classified as TDRs are reported as impaired loans.

Recent Accounting Standards

In January 2010, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2010-06, Improving Disclosures About Fair Value Measurements. ASU 2010-06 requires separate disclosure of the amounts of significant transfers in and out of Level 1 and Level 2 fair value measurements and reasons for the transfers and separate presentation of information about purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements in the reconciliation for Level 3 fair value measurements. Additionally, ASU 2010-06 clarifies existing disclosures regarding level of disaggregation and inputs and valuation techniques. The new disclosures and clarifications of existing disclosures under ASU 2010-06 are effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2009, except for the disclosures about purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements in the roll forward of activity in Level 3 fair value measurements which are effective for fiscal years ending after December 15, 2010 and for interim periods within those fiscal years. The adoption of the disclosure requirements did not have a material effect on the Company's condensed consolidated financial statements.

In December 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-28, Intangibles-Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): When to Perform Step 2 of the Goodwill Impairment Test for Reporting Units with Zero or Negative Carrying Amounts, which modifies Step 1 of the goodwill impairment test for reporting units with zero or negative carrying amounts. For those reporting units, an entity is required to perform Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test if it is more likely than not that a goodwill impairment exists. In determining whether it is more likely than not that a goodwill impairment exists, an entity should also consider whether there are any adverse qualitative factors indicating that an impairment may exist. The amendments in ASU 2010-28 are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2010 and for interim periods within those fiscal years. Upon adoption of the amendments, any resulting goodwill impairment should be recorded as a cumulative-effect adjustment to beginning retained earnings in the period of adoption. Any goodwill impairments occurring after the initial adoption of the amendments should be included in earnings. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material effect on the Company's condensed consolidated financial statements.

In December 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-29, Business Combinations (Topic 805): Disclosure of Supplementary Pro Forma Information for Business Combinations, which specifies that if a public entity presents comparative financials, the entity should disclose revenue and earnings of the combined entity as though the business combination(s) that occurred during the current year had occurred as of the beginning of the comparable prior annual reporting period only. ASU 2010-29 also expands the supplemental pro forma disclosures to include a description of the nature and amount of material, nonrecurring pro forma adjustments directly attributable to the business combination included in the reported pro forma revenue and earnings. The amendments in ASU 2010-29 are effective prospectively for business combinations for which the acquisition date is on or after the beginning of the first annual reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2010. Early adoption is permitted. The adoption of the disclosure requirements did not have a material effect on the Company's condensed consolidated financial statements.

In April 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-02, Receivables (Topic 310) A Creditor's Determination of Whether a Restructuring Is a Troubled Debt Restructuring. ASU 2011-02 clarifies the guidance on the two conditions that must exist in evaluating whether a restructuring constitutes a troubled debt restructuring: that the restructuring constitutes a concession and that the debtor is experiencing financial difficulties. In addition, ASU 2011-02 clarifies that a creditor is precluded from using the effective interest rate test in the debtor's guidance on restructuring of payables (paragraph 470-60-55-10) when evaluating whether a restructuring constitutes a troubled debt restructuring. The amendments in ASU 2011-02 are effective for the first interim or annual period beginning on or after June 15, 2011, and should be applied retrospectively to the beginning of the annual period of adoption. Additionally, ASU 2011-02 finalizes the effective date for the disclosures required by paragraphs 310-10-50-33 through 50-34, which were deferred by ASU 2011-01, for interim and annual periods beginning on or after June 15, 2011. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material effect on the Company's condensed consolidated financial statements.

In April 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-03, Transfers and Servicing (Topic 860): Reconsideration of Effective Control for Repurchase Agreements. ASU 2011-03 removes the transferor's ability criterion from the consideration of effective control for repos and other agreements that both entitle and obligate the transferor to repurchase or redeem financial assets before their maturity. The amendments in ASU 2011-03 remove from the assessment of effective control (1) the criterion requiring the transferor to have the ability to repurchase or redeem the financial assets on substantially the agreed terms, even in the event of default by the transferee, and (2) the collateral maintenance implementation guidance related to that criterion. The FASB indicates that eliminating the transferor's ability criterion and related implementation guidance from an entity's assessment of effective control should improve the accounting for repos and other similar transactions. The amendments in ASU 2011-03 are effective for the first interim or annual period beginning on or after December 15, 2011 and are to be applied prospectively to transactions or modifications of existing transactions that occur on or after the effective date. Early adoption is not permitted. The Company does not expect the adoption of this guidance to have a material effect on its condensed consolidated financial statements.

In May 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-04, Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRSs. ASU 2011-04 addresses convergence between GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”) requirements for measurement of and disclosures about fair value. The amendments are not expected to have a significant impact on companies applying GAAP. Key provisions of the amendment include: a prohibition on grouping financial instruments for purposes of determining fair value, except when an entity manages market and credit risks on the basis of the entity's net exposure to the group; an extension of the prohibition against the use of a blockage factor to all fair value measurements (that prohibition currently applies only to financial instruments with quoted prices in active markets); and a requirement that for recurring Level 3 fair value measurements, entities disclose quantitative information about unobservable inputs, a description of the valuation process used and qualitative details about the sensitivity of the measurements. In addition, for items not carried at fair value but for which fair value is disclosed, entities will be required to disclose the level within the fair value hierarchy that applies to the fair value measurement disclosed. The amendments in ASU 2011-04 are effective during interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011. Early adoption is not permitted. The Company does not expect the adoption of this guidance to have a material effect on its condensed consolidated financial statements.

In June 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-05, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Presentation of Comprehensive Income. ASU 2011-05 will require companies to present the components of net income and other comprehensive income either as one continuous statement or as two consecutive statements. It eliminates the option to present components of other comprehensive income as part of the statement of changes in stockholders' equity. The standard does not change the items which must be reported in other comprehensive income, how such items are measured, or when they must be reclassified to net income. This standard is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011. The Company does not expect the adoption of this guidance to have a material effect on its condensed consolidated financial statements.

In September 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-08, Intangibles-Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Testing Goodwill for Impairment. ASU 2011-08 gives both public and nonpublic companies the option to qualitatively determine whether they can bypass the two-step goodwill impairment test under ASC 350-20, Intangibles – Goodwill and Other: Goodwill. Under ASU 2011-08, if a company chooses to perform a qualitative assessment and determines that it is more likely than not (a more than 50 percent likelihood) that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, it would then perform Step 1 of the annual goodwill impairment test in ASC 350-20 and, if necessary, proceed to Step 2. Otherwise, no further evaluation would be necessary. The amended guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011. Early adoption is permitted. The Company does not expect the adoption of this guidance to have a material effect on its condensed consolidated financial statements.