Significant New Authoritative Accounting Guidance	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2011
Significant New Authoritative Accounting Guidance [Abstract]
Significant New Authoritative Accounting Guidance	NOTE 2. SIGNIFICANT NEW AUTHORITATIVE ACCOUNTING GUIDANCE ASU No. 2010-06, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures (Topic 820) - Improving Disclosures About Fair Value Measurements, requires expanded disclosures related to fair value measurements including (i) the amounts of significant transfers of assets or liabilities between Levels 1 and 2 of the fair value hierarchy and the reasons for the transfers, (ii) the reasons for transfers of assets or liabilities in or out of Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy, with significant transfers disclosed separately, (iii) the policy for determining when transfers between levels of the fair value hierarchy are recognized and (iv) for recurring fair value measurements of assets and liabilities in Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy, a gross presentation of information about purchases, sales, issuances and settlements. ASU 2010-06 further clarifies that (i) fair value measurement disclosures should be provided for each class of assets and liabilities (rather than major category), which would generally be a subset of assets or liabilities within a line item in the statement of financial position and (ii) company's should provide disclosures about the valuation techniques and inputs used to measure fair value for both recurring and nonrecurring fair value measurements for each class of assets and liabilities included in Levels 2 and 3 of the fair value hierarchy. The disclosures related to the gross presentation of purchases, sales, issuances and settlements of assets and liabilities included in Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy was required for us beginning January 1, 2011. The remaining disclosure requirements and clarifications made by ASU 2010-06 became effective for us on January 1, 2010. See Note 3 – Fair Value Measurements. ASU No. 2010-11, Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815) - Scope Exception Related to Embedded Credit Derivatives clarifies that the only form of an embedded credit derivative that is exempt from embedded derivative bifurcation requirements are those that relate to the subordination of one financial instrument to another. As a result, entities that have contracts containing an embedded credit derivative feature in a form other than such subordination may need to separately account for the embedded credit derivative feature. The provisions of ASU 2010-11 were effective for us on July 1, 2010 and did not have a significant impact on our financial statements. ASU No. 2010-20, Receivables (Topic 310) - Disclosures about the Credit Quality of Financing Receivables and the Allowance for Credit Losses requires entities to provide disclosures designed to facilitate financial statement users' evaluation of (i) the nature of credit risk inherent in the entity's portfolio of financing receivables, (ii) how that risk is analyzed and assessed in arriving at the allowance for credit losses and (iii) the changes and reasons for those changes in the allowance for credit losses. Disclosures must be disaggregated by portfolio segment, the level at which an entity develops and documents a systematic method for determining its allowance for credit losses, and class of financing receivable. The required disclosures include, among other things, a rollforward of the allowance for credit losses as well as information about modified, impaired, non-accrual and past due loans and credit quality indicators. ASU 2010-20 was effective for our financial statements as of December 31, 2010, as it relates to disclosures required as of the end of a reporting period. Disclosures that relate to activity during a reporting period were required for our financial statements that include periods beginning on or after January 1, 2011. ASU No. 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 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 consider whether there are any adverse qualitative factors indicating that an impairment may exist. The qualitative factors are consistent with the existing guidance and examples in paragraph 350-20-35-30, which requires that goodwill of a reporting unit be tested for impairment between annual tests if an event occurs or circumstances change that would more likely than not reduce the fair value of a reporting unit below its carrying amount. This amendment became effective for us beginning with the 2011 year and had no material impact on our financial statements. ASU No. 2011-01, Receivables (Topic 310) – Deferral of the Effective Date of Disclosures about Troubled Debt Restructurings in Update No. 2010-20 temporarily delays the effective date of the disclosures regarding troubled debt restructurings in ASU No. 2010-20 for public entities. The effective date was for interim and annual reporting periods which ended after June 15, 2011. ASU 2011-02, Receivables (Topic 310): A Creditor's Determination of Whether a Restructuring is a Troubled Debt Restructuring provides additional guidance to clarify when a loan modification or restructuring is considered a troubled debt restructuring (TDR) in order to address current diversity in practice and lead to more consistent application of U.S. GAAP for debt restructurings. In evaluating whether a restructuring constitutes a troubled debt restructuring, a creditor must separately conclude that both of the following exist: (1) the restructuring constitutes a concession, and (2) the debtor is experiencing financial difficulties. The amendments to Topic 310 clarify the guidance regarding the evaluation of both considerations above. Additionally, the amendments clarify 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 TDR. This amendment was effective for us July 1, 2011. Retrospective application to the beginning of the annual period of adoption for modifications occurring on or after the beginning of the annual adoption period is required. As a result of applying these amendments, we may identify receivables that are newly considered to be impaired. For purposes of measuring impairment of those receivables, an entity should apply the amendments prospectively for the first interim or annual period beginning on or after June 15, 2011. ASU No. 2011-03, Transfers and Servicing (Topic 860) - Reconsideration of Effective Control for Repurchase Agreement is intended to improve financial reporting of repurchase agreements and other agreements that both entitle and obligate a transferor to repurchase or redeem financial assets before their maturity. ASU 2011-03 removes from the assessment of effective control (i) 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 (ii) the collateral maintenance guidance related to that criterion. ASU 2011-03 will be effective for us on January 1, 2012 and is not expected to have a significant impact on our financial statements. ASU 2011-04, Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820) - Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurements and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRSs amends Topic 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures, to converge the fair value measurement guidance in U.S. generally accepted accounting principles and International Financial Reporting Standards. ASU 2011-04 clarifies the application of existing fair value measurement requirements, changes certain principles in Topic 820 and requires additional fair value disclosures. ASU 2011-04 is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011, and is not expected to have a significant impact on our financial statements. ASU 2011-05, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220) - Presentation of Comprehensive Income amends Topic 220, Comprehensive Income, to require that all nonowner changes in stockholders' equity be presented in either a single continuous statement of comprehensive income or in two separate but consecutive statements. Additionally, ASU 2011-05 requires entities to present, on the face of the financial statements, reclassification adjustments for items that are reclassified from other comprehensive income to net income in the statement or statements where the components of net income and the components of other comprehensive income are presented. The option to present components of other comprehensive income as part of the statement of changes in stockholders' equity was eliminated. ASU 2011-05 is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011, and is not expected to have a significant impact on our financial statements. ASU 2011-08, Intangibles - Goodwill and Other (Topic 350) - Testing Goodwill for Impairment, amends Topic 350, Intangibles –Goodwill and Other, to permit entities to first assess qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount as a basis for determining whether it is necessary to perform the two-step goodwill impairment test described in Topic 350. The more-than-likely-than-not threshold is defined as having a likelihood of more than 50 percent. If, after assessing the totality of events or circumstances, an entity determines it is not more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, then performing the two-step impairment test is unnecessary. However, if an entity concludes otherwise, then it is required to perform the first step of the two-step impairment test by calculating the fair value of the reporting unit and comparing the fair value with the carrying amount of the reporting unit. If the carrying amount of the reporting unit exceeds its fair value, then the entity is required to perform the second step of the goodwill impairment test to measure the amount of impairment loss, if any. ASU 2011-08 is effective for annual and interim impairment tests beginning after December 15, 2011, and is not expected to have a significant impact on our financial statements. ASU 2011-12, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Deferral of the Effective Date for Amendments to the Presentation of Reclassifications of Items Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income in Accounting Standards Update No. 2011-05 defers changes in ASU No. 2011-05 that relate to the presentation of reclassification adjustments to allow the FASB time to reconsider whether to require presentation of such adjustments on the face of the financial statements to show the effects of reclassifications out of accumulated other comprehensive income on the components of net income and other comprehensive income. ASU 2011-12 allows entities to continue to report reclassifications out of accumulated other comprehensive income consistent with the presentation requirements in effect before ASU No. 2011-05. All other requirements in ASU No. 2011-05 are not affected by ASU No. 2011-12. ASU 2011-12 is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2011 and is not expected to have a significant impact on our financial statements.

NOTE 2. SIGNIFICANT NEW AUTHORITATIVE ACCOUNTING GUIDANCE

ASU No. 2010-06, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures (Topic 820) - Improving Disclosures About Fair Value Measurements, requires expanded disclosures related to fair value measurements including (i) the amounts of significant transfers of assets or liabilities between Levels 1 and 2 of the fair value hierarchy and the reasons for the transfers, (ii) the reasons for transfers of assets or liabilities in or out of Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy, with significant transfers disclosed separately, (iii) the policy for determining when transfers between levels of the fair value hierarchy are recognized and (iv) for recurring fair value measurements of assets and liabilities in Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy, a gross presentation of information about purchases, sales, issuances and settlements. ASU 2010-06 further clarifies that (i) fair value measurement disclosures should be provided for each class of assets and liabilities (rather than major category), which would generally be a subset of assets or liabilities within a line item in the statement of financial position and (ii) company's should provide disclosures about the valuation techniques and inputs used to measure fair value for both recurring and nonrecurring fair value measurements for each class of assets and liabilities included in Levels 2 and 3 of the fair value hierarchy. The disclosures related to the gross presentation of purchases, sales, issuances and settlements of assets and liabilities included in Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy was required for us beginning January 1, 2011. The remaining disclosure requirements and clarifications made by ASU 2010-06 became effective for us on January 1, 2010. See Note 3 – Fair Value Measurements.

ASU No. 2010-11, Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815) - Scope Exception Related to Embedded Credit Derivatives clarifies that the only form of an embedded credit derivative that is exempt from embedded derivative bifurcation requirements are those that relate to the subordination of one financial instrument to another. As a result, entities that have contracts containing an embedded credit derivative feature in a form other than such subordination may need to separately account for the embedded credit derivative feature. The provisions of ASU 2010-11 were effective for us on July 1, 2010 and did not have a significant impact on our financial statements.

ASU No. 2010-20, Receivables (Topic 310) - Disclosures about the Credit Quality of Financing Receivables and the Allowance for Credit Losses requires entities to provide disclosures designed to facilitate financial statement users' evaluation of (i) the nature of credit risk inherent in the entity's portfolio of financing receivables, (ii) how that risk is analyzed and assessed in arriving at the allowance for credit losses and (iii) the changes and reasons for those changes in the allowance for credit losses. Disclosures must be disaggregated by portfolio segment, the level at which an entity develops and documents a systematic method for determining its allowance for credit losses, and class of financing receivable. The required disclosures include, among other things, a rollforward of the allowance for credit losses as well as information about modified, impaired, non-accrual and past due loans and credit quality indicators. ASU 2010-20 was effective for our financial statements as of December 31, 2010, as it relates to disclosures required as of the end of a reporting period. Disclosures that relate to activity during a reporting period were required for our financial statements that include periods beginning on or after January 1, 2011.

ASU No. 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 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 consider whether there are any adverse qualitative factors indicating that an impairment may exist. The qualitative factors are consistent with the existing guidance and examples in paragraph 350-20-35-30, which requires that goodwill of a reporting unit be tested for impairment between annual tests if an event occurs or circumstances change that would more likely than not reduce the fair value of a reporting unit below its carrying amount. This amendment became effective for us beginning with the 2011 year and had no material impact on our financial statements.

ASU No. 2011-01, Receivables (Topic 310) – Deferral of the Effective Date of Disclosures about Troubled Debt Restructurings in Update No. 2010-20 temporarily delays the effective date of the disclosures regarding troubled debt restructurings in ASU No. 2010-20 for public entities. The effective date was for interim and annual reporting periods which ended after June 15, 2011.

ASU 2011-02, Receivables (Topic 310): A Creditor's Determination of Whether a Restructuring is a Troubled Debt Restructuring provides additional guidance to clarify when a loan modification or restructuring is considered a troubled debt restructuring (TDR) in order to address current diversity in practice and lead to more consistent application of U.S. GAAP for debt restructurings. In evaluating whether a restructuring constitutes a troubled debt restructuring, a creditor must separately conclude that both of the following exist: (1) the restructuring constitutes a concession, and (2) the debtor is experiencing financial difficulties. The amendments to Topic 310 clarify the guidance regarding the evaluation of both considerations above. Additionally, the amendments clarify 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 TDR. This amendment was effective for us July 1, 2011. Retrospective application to the beginning of the annual period of adoption for modifications occurring on or after the beginning of the annual adoption period is required. As a result of applying these amendments, we may identify receivables that are newly considered to be impaired. For purposes of measuring impairment of those receivables, an entity should apply the amendments prospectively for the first interim or annual period beginning on or after June 15, 2011.

ASU No. 2011-03, Transfers and Servicing (Topic 860) - Reconsideration of Effective Control for Repurchase Agreement is intended to improve financial reporting of repurchase agreements and other agreements that both entitle and obligate a transferor to repurchase or redeem financial assets before their maturity. ASU 2011-03 removes from the assessment of effective control (i) 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 (ii) the collateral maintenance guidance related to that criterion. ASU 2011-03 will be effective for us on January 1, 2012 and is not expected to have a significant impact on our financial statements.

ASU 2011-04, Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820) - Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurements and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRSs amends Topic 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures, to converge the fair value measurement guidance in U.S. generally accepted accounting principles and International Financial Reporting Standards. ASU 2011-04 clarifies the application of existing fair value measurement requirements, changes certain principles in Topic 820 and requires additional fair value disclosures. ASU 2011-04 is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011, and is not expected to have a significant impact on our financial statements.

ASU 2011-05, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220) - Presentation of Comprehensive Income amends Topic 220, Comprehensive Income, to require that all nonowner changes in stockholders' equity be presented in either a single continuous statement of comprehensive income or in two separate but consecutive statements. Additionally, ASU 2011-05 requires entities to present, on the face of the financial statements, reclassification adjustments for items that are reclassified from other comprehensive income to net income in the statement or statements where the components of net income and the components of other comprehensive income are presented. The option to present components of other comprehensive income as part of the statement of changes in stockholders' equity was eliminated. ASU 2011-05 is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011, and is not expected to have a significant impact on our financial statements.

ASU 2011-08, Intangibles - Goodwill and Other (Topic 350) - Testing Goodwill for Impairment, amends Topic 350, Intangibles –Goodwill and Other, to permit entities to first assess qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount as a basis for determining whether it is necessary to perform the two-step goodwill impairment test described in Topic 350. The more-than-likely-than-not threshold is defined as having a likelihood of more than 50 percent. If, after assessing the totality of events or circumstances, an entity determines it is not more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, then performing the two-step impairment test is unnecessary. However, if an entity concludes otherwise, then it is required to perform the first step of the two-step impairment test by calculating the fair value of the reporting unit and comparing the fair value with the carrying amount of the reporting unit. If the carrying amount of the reporting unit exceeds its fair value, then the entity is required to perform the second step of the goodwill impairment test to measure the amount of impairment loss, if any. ASU 2011-08 is effective for annual and interim impairment tests beginning after December 15, 2011, and is not expected to have a significant impact on our financial statements.

ASU 2011-12, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Deferral of the Effective Date for Amendments to the Presentation of Reclassifications of Items Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income in Accounting Standards Update No. 2011-05 defers changes in ASU No. 2011-05 that relate to the presentation of reclassification adjustments to allow the FASB time to reconsider whether to require presentation of such adjustments on the face of the financial statements to show the effects of reclassifications out of accumulated other comprehensive income on the components of net income and other comprehensive income. ASU 2011-12 allows entities to continue to report reclassifications out of accumulated other comprehensive income consistent with the presentation requirements in effect before ASU No. 2011-05. All other requirements in ASU No. 2011-05 are not affected by ASU No. 2011-12. ASU 2011-12 is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2011 and is not expected to have a significant impact on our financial statements.