The Corporation is subject to various regulatory capital requirements imposed by the federal banking agencies. Failure to meet minimum capital requirements can result in certain mandatory and possibly additional discretionary actions by regulators that, if undertaken, could have a direct material effect on the Corporation's financial statements. Under capital adequacy guidelines and the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action, the Corporation must meet specific capital guidelines that involve quantitative measures of the Corporation's assets, liabilities, and certain off-balance sheet items as calculated under regulatory accounting practices. The Corporation's capital amounts and classification are also subject to qualitative judgment by the regulators about components, risk weightings, and other factors.

Capital standards established by regulations require the Corporation to maintain minimum amounts and ratios for Leverage (Tier 1 capital to average total assets) and ratios of Tier 1 Capital to Risk-Weighted Assets and Total Capital to Risk-Weighted Assets as defined in the regulations. The total amount of risk-weighted assets is computed by applying risk-weighting factors to the Corporation's assets and certain off-balance sheet items, which generally vary from 0% to 100% depending on the nature of the asset.

Effective June 2, 2010, FirstBank, by and through its Board of Directors, entered into a Consent Order (the “FDIC Order”) with the FDIC and OCIF. The FDIC Order provides for various things, including (among other things) the following: (1) having and retaining qualified management; (2) increased participation in the affairs of FirstBank by its Board of Directors; (3) development and implementation by FirstBank of a capital plan to attain a leverage ratio of at least 8%, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of at least 10% and a total risk-based capital ratio of at least 12%; (4) adoption and implementation of strategic, liquidity, and fund management and profit and budget plans and related projects within certain timetables set forth in the FDIC Order and on an ongoing basis; (5) adoption and implementation of plans for reducing FirstBank's positions in certain classified assets and delinquent and non-accrual loans within timeframes set forth in the FDIC Order; (6) refraining from lending to delinquent or classified borrowers already obligated to FirstBank on any extensions of credit so long as such credit remains uncollected, except where FirstBank's failure to extend further credit to a particular borrower would be detrimental to the best interests of FirstBank, and any such additional credit is approved by FirstBank's Board of Directors; (7) refraining from accepting, increasing, renewing, or rolling over brokered CDs without the prior written approval of the FDIC; (8) establishment of a comprehensive policy and methodology for determining the allowance for loan and lease losses and the review and revision of FirstBank's loan policies, including the non-accrual policy; and (9) adoption and implementation of adequate and effective programs of independent loan review, appraisal compliance, and an effective policy for managing FirstBank's sensitivity to interest rate risk. The foregoing summary is not complete and is qualified in all respects by reference to the actual language of the FDIC Order.

Effective June 3, 2010, First BanCorp. entered into the Written Agreement with the FED. The Written Agreement provides, among other things, that the holding company must serve as a source of strength to FirstBank, and that, except upon consent of the FED, (1) the holding company may not pay dividends to stockholders or receive dividends from FirstBank, (2) the holding company and its nonbank subsidiaries may not make payments on trust- preferred securities or subordinated debt, and (3) the holding company cannot incur, increase, or guarantee debt or repurchase any capital securities. The Written Agreement also requires that the holding company submit a capital plan that reflects sufficient capital at First BanCorp. on a consolidated basis, which must be acceptable to the FED, and follow certain guidelines with respect to the appointment or change in responsibilities of senior officers. The foregoing summary is not complete and is qualified in all respects by reference to the actual language of the Written Agreement.

The Corporation submitted its capital plan setting forth how it plans to improve capital positions to comply with the FDIC Order and the Written Agreement over time. In March 2011, the Corporation submitted an updated Capital Plan to the regulators. The updated Capital Plan contemplated a $350 million capital raise through the issuance of new common shares for cash, and other actions to reduce the Corporation's and the Bank's risk-weighted assets, strengthen their capital positions, and meet the minimum capital ratios required under the FDIC Order. Among the strategies contemplated in the updated Capital Plan are reductions of the Corporation's loan and investment securities portfolio. The updated Capital Plan identified specific targeted Leverage, Tier 1 Capital to Risk-Weighted Assets and Total Capital to Risk-Weighted Assets ratios to be achieved by the Bank each calendar quarter until the capital levels required under the FDIC Order were achieved. Although all of the regulatory capital ratios exceeded the minimum capital ratios for “well-capitalized” levels, as well as the minimum capital ratios required by the FDIC Order, as of December 31, 2012, FirstBank cannot be treated as a “well-capitalized” institution under regulatory guidance while operating under the FDIC Order.

On October 7, 2011, the Corporation successfully completed a private placement of $525 million in shares of common stock. The proceeds from the sale of common stock amounted to approximately $490 million (net of offering costs), of which $435 million were contributed to the Corporation's wholly owned banking subsidiary, FirstBank. The completion of the capital raise allowed the conversion of the 424,174 shares of the Corporation's Series G Preferred Stock, held by the Treasury, into 32.9 million shares of common stock at a conversion price of $9.66. This conversion required for completion the payment of $26.4 million for past-due undeclared cumulative dividends on the Series G Preferred Stock as required by the agreement with the Treasury.

Furthermore, on December 8, 2011, the Corporation completed a rights offering in which the Corporation issued an additional 888,781 shares of common stock at $3.50 per share, and received proceeds of $3.3 million.

With the $525 million capital infusion, the conversion to common stock of the Series G Preferred Stock held by the Treasury, and the issuance of an additional $3.3 million of capital in the rights offering (after deducting estimated offering expenses and the $26.4 million payment of cumulative dividends on the Series G Preferred Stock), the Corporation increased its total common equity by approximately $834 million. Prior to the capital raise, deleveraging strategies incorporated into the Capital Plan and completed during the year ended December 31, 2011 that significantly affected the financial results of such year include:

In addition to the Capital Plan, the Corporation submitted to its regulators a liquidity and brokered CD plan, including a contingency funding plan, a non-performing asset reduction plan, a budget and profit plan, a strategic plan, and a plan for the reduction of classified and special mention assets. As of December 31, 2012, the Corporation had completed all of the items included in the Capital Plan and is working on to continue to reduce non-performing loans. Further, the Corporation has reviewed and enhanced the Corporation's loan review program, various credit policies, the Corporation's treasury and investment policy, the Corporation's asset classification and allowance for loan and lease losses and non-accrual policies, the Corporation's charge-off policy, and the Corporation's appraisal program. The Regulatory Agreements also require the submission to the regulators of quarterly progress reports.

The FDIC Order imposes no other restrictions on FirstBank's products or services offered to customers, nor does it or the Written Agreement impose any type of penalties or fines upon FirstBank or the Corporation. Concurrent with the FDIC Order, the FDIC has granted FirstBank quarterly waivers to enable it to continue accessing the brokered CD market through March 31, 2013. FirstBank will request approvals for future periods.

In June 2012, the U.S. banking regulators jointly published three notices of proposed rulemaking that are essentially intended to implement the Basel III for U.S. banks. Together these notices of proposed rulemaking would, among other things: (i) implement in the United Stated the Basel III regulatory capital reforms, including those that revise the definition of capital, increase minimum capital ratios, and introduce a minimum Tier 1 common equity ratio of 4.5% and a capital conservation buffer of 2.5% (for a total minimum Tier 1 common equity ratio of 7.0%); (ii) revise “Basel I” rules for calculating risk-weighted assets to enhance risk sensitivity; and (iii) comply with the Dodd-Frank Act provision prohibiting the reliance on external credit ratings. The implementation of Basel III in the United States has been postponed indefinetely.

Although uncertainty exists regarding the final capital rules, based on our current interpretation of the proposed Basel III capital rules, we anticipate to exceed the fully phased-in minimum capital ratios as established in the current proposal. The proposed Basel III capital rules and interpretations used in estimating our Basel III calculations are subject to change depending on final Basel III capital rules.

The Corporation's and its banking subsidiary's regulatory capital positions as of December 31, 2012 and 2011 were as follows:

	Regulatory Requirements
	Actual			For Capital Adequacy Purposes			To be Well-Capitalized-Regular Thresholds			Consent Order Capital requirements
	Actual			For Capital Adequacy Purposes			To be Well-Capitalized-Regular Thresholds			Consent Order Capital requirements
	Amount		Ratio	Amount		Ratio	Amount		Ratio	Amount		Ratio
		(Dollars in thousands)
At December 31, 2012
Total Capital (to
Risk-Weighted Assets)
First BanCorp	$	1,770,003	17.82%	$	794,698	8%		N/A	N/A		N/A	N/A
FirstBank	$	1,723,085	17.35%	$	794,594	8%	$	993,243	10%	$	1,191,891	12%

Tier I Capital (to
Risk-Weighted Assets)
First BanCorp	$	1,640,082	16.51%	$	397,349	4%		N/A	N/A		N/A	N/A
FirstBank	$	1,593,225	16.04%	$	399,297	4%	$	595,946	6%	$	993,243	10%

Leverage ratio
First BanCorp	$	1,640,082	12.60%	$	520,664	4%		N/A	N/A		N/A	N/A
FirstBank	$	1,593,225	12.25%	$	520,056	4%	$	650,069	5%	$	1,040,111	8%

At December 31, 2011
Total Capital (to
Risk-Weighted Assets)
First BanCorp	$	1,742,357	17.12%	$	814,418	8%		N/A	N/A		N/A	N/A
FirstBank	$	1,688,496	16.58%	$	814,789	8%	$	1,018,486	10%	$	1,222,184	12%

Tier I Capital (to
Risk-Weighted Assets)
First BanCorp	$	1,607,191	15.79%	$	407,209	4%		N/A	N/A		N/A	N/A
FirstBank	$	1,553,374	15.25%	$	407,395	4%	$	611,092	6%	$	1,018,486	10%

Leverage ratio
First BanCorp	$	1,607,191	11.91%	$	539,942	4%		N/A	N/A		N/A	N/A
FirstBank	$	1,553,374	11.52%	$	539,500	4%	$	674,375	5%	$	1,078,999	8%

The following table presents a detail of commitments to extend credit and standby letters of credit, and commitments to sell loans:

	December 31,
	2012		2011
	(In thousands)
Financial instruments whose contract amounts represent credit risk:
Commitments to extend credit:
To originate	$	85,364	$	129,271
Unused personal lines of credit		1,054,265		31,134
Commercial lines of credit		440,181		409,297
Commercial letters of credit		41,759		52,340

Standby letters of credit		17,956		25,448

Commitments to sell loans		29,614		20,226

The Corporation's exposure to credit loss in the event of nonperformance by the other party to the financial instrument on commitments to extend credit and standby letters of credit is represented by the contractual amount of those instruments. Management uses the same credit policies and approval process in entering into commitments and conditional obligations as it does for on-balance-sheet instruments.

Commitments to extend credit are agreements to lend to a customer as long as there is no violation of any conditions established in the contract. Commitments generally have fixed expiration dates or other termination clauses. Since certain commitments are expected to expire without being drawn upon, the total commitment amount does not necessarily represent future cash requirements. For most of the commercial lines of credit, the Corporation has the option to reevaluate the agreement prior to additional disbursements. In the case of credit cards and personal lines of credit, the Corporation can cancel at any time and without cause the unused credit facility. Generally, the Corporation's mortgage banking activities do not enter into interest rate lock agreements with prospective borrowers. The amount of any collateral obtained if deemed necessary by the Corporation upon an extension of credit is based on management's credit evaluation of the borrower. Rates charged on loans that are finally disbursed are the rates being offered at the time the loans are closed; therefore, no fee is charged on these commitments.

In general, commercial and standby letters of credit are issued to facilitate foreign and domestic trade transactions. Normally, commercial and standby letters of credit are short-term commitments used to finance commercial contracts for the shipment of goods. The collateral for these letters of credit includes cash or available commercial lines of credit. The fair value of commercial and standby letters of credit is based on the fees currently charged for such agreements, which, as of December 31, 2012 and 2011, was not significant.

The Corporation obtained from GNMA, commitment authority to issue GNMA mortgage-backed securities. Under this program, for 2012, the Corporation securitized approximately $239.8 million of FHA/VA mortgage loan production into GNMA mortgage-backed securities.

Lehman Brothers Special Financing, Inc. (“Lehman”) was the counterparty to the Corporation on certain interest rate swap agreements. During the third quarter of 2008, Lehman failed to pay the scheduled net cash settlement due to the Corporation, which constituted an event of default under those interest rate swap agreements. The Corporation terminated all interest rate swaps with Lehman and replaced them with other counterparties under similar terms and conditions. In connection with the unpaid net cash settlement under the swap agreements, the Corporation has an unsecured counterparty exposure with Lehman, which filed for bankruptcy on October 3, 2008, of approximately $1.4 million. This exposure was reserved in the third quarter of 2008. The Corporation had pledged collateral with a $63.6 million face value to guarantee its performance under the swap agreements in the event payment thereunder was required.

Since the second quarter of 2009, the Corporation has maintained a non-performing asset with a book value of $64.5 million in addition to accrued interest of $2.1 million related to the collateral pledged to Lehman. The Corporation believes that the securities pledged as collateral should not be part of the Lehman bankruptcy estate given the fact that the posted collateral constituted a performance guarantee under the swap agreements and was not part of a financing agreement, and that ownership of the securities was never transferred to Lehman. Upon termination of the interest rate swap agreements, Lehman's obligation was to return the collateral to the Corporation. During the fourth quarter of 2009, the Corporation discovered that Lehman Brothers, Inc., acting as agent of Lehman, had deposited the securities in a custodial account at JP Morgan Chase, and that, shortly before the filing of the Lehman bankruptcy proceedings, it had provided instructions to have most of the securities transferred to Barclays Capital (“Barclays”) in New York. After Barclays's refusal to turn over the securities, the Corporation filed a lawsuit against Barclays in federal court in New York demanding the return of the securities in December 2009. During February 2010, Barclays filed a motion with the court requesting that the Corporation's claim be dismissed on the grounds that the allegations of the complaint are not sufficient to justify the granting of the remedies therein sought. Shortly thereafter, the Corporation filed its opposition motion. A hearing on the motions was held in court on April 28, 2010. The court, on that date, after hearing the arguments by both sides, concluded that the Corporation's equitable-based causes of action, upon which the return of the investment securities is being demanded, contain allegations that sufficiently plead facts warranting the denial of Barclays' motion to dismiss the Corporation's claim. Accordingly, the judge ordered the case to proceed to trial.

Subsequent to the court decision, the district court judge transferred the case to the Lehman bankruptcy court for trial. Discovery pursuant to that case management plan has been completed. The parties filed dispositive motions on September 13, 2012. Oppositions to such motions and replies thereto were filed in October 2012 and November 2012, respectively. On January 16, 2013, a hearing for oral arguments was held in bankruptcy court. Upon conclusion of the hearing, the judge informed the parties that the matter would be taken under advisement with a written ruling to be issued subsequently. The Corporation may not succeed in its litigation against Barclays to recover all or a substantial portion of the securities.

Additionally, the Corporation continues to pursue its claim filed in January 2009 in the proceedings under the Securities Protection Act with regard to Lehman Brothers Incorporated in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York.

Because the Corporation has not had the benefit of the use of the investment securities pledged to Lehman (i.e., ability to sell, pledge, or transfer), and because the Corporation has not received principal or interest payments since 2008 (after the collapse of Lehman), the appropriate carrying value of these securities has been under review with our regulators, with recent heightened concern due to the complex and lengthy litigation regarding this matter. If, as a result of these discussions, developments in the litigation, or for other reasons, the Corporation should determine that it is probable that the asset has been impaired and that it needs to recognize a partial or full loss for the investment securities pledged to Lehman, such an action would adversely affect the Corporation's results of operations in the period in which such action is taken. The Corporation expects to reassess the recoverability of the asset upon the resolution of the dispositive motions filed with the court.

As of December 31,2012, First BanCorp and its subsidiaries were defendants in various legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business. Management believes that the final disposition of these matters will not have a material adverse effect on the Corporation's financial position or results of operations.