Commitments and Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2013
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Sites Related to Callahan Mining Corporation In 1991, the Company acquired all of the outstanding common stock of Callahan Mining Corporation. Since then, the Company has received requests for information or notices of potential liability from state or federal agencies with regard to Callahan's operations at sites in Idaho, Maine, Colorado and Washington. The Company did not make any decisions with respect to generation, transport or disposal of hazardous waste at these sites. Therefore, the Company believes that it is not liable for any potential cleanup costs either directly as an operator or indirectly as a parent. To date, none of these agencies have made any claims against the Company or Callahan for cleanup costs. The Company anticipates that further agency interaction may be possible with respect to three of these sites, discussed below. Callahan operated a mine and mill in Brooksville, Maine from 1968 until 1972 and subsequently disposed of the property. In 2000, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA, made a formal request to the Company for information regarding the site. The site was placed on the National Priorities List on September 5, 2002, and the Maine Department of Transportation, a partial owner of the property, signed a consent order in 2005. In January 2009, the EPA and the State of Maine made additional formal requests to the Company for information relating to the site, to which the Company responded. The first phase of cleanup at the site began in April 2011. The Van Stone Mine in Stevens County, Washington consists of several parcels and was mined from 1926 until 1993. Callahan sold its parcel in 1990. In February 2010, the State of Washington Department of Ecology notified Callahan Mining Corporation that it, among others, is a potentially liable person (PLP) under Washington law. Asarco LLC ("Asarco"), an affiliate of American Smelting and Refining Company, which developed the mill on the site in 1951, settled for $3.5 million. Another potentially liable person, Vaagen Brothers, signed a consent order which allows access to the site for a Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study. Neither the Company nor Callahan Mining Corporation has received any further notices from the Washington Department of Ecology. On June 5, 2012, Asarco filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington against five named defendants, including Callahan Mining Corporation, seeking contribution for the $3.5 million settlement. Callahan Mining Corporation filed a response and defense to the lawsuit on December 11, 2012 and does not believe it has any liability to Asarco. The Court has set a trial date for September 22, 2014. On January 23, 2013, the Court entered an Order dismissing one of the five named defendants from the lawsuit as a result of the parties reaching a settlement. Callahan controlled the Akron Mine located in Gunnison County, Colorado under lease and option agreements with several owners from 1937-1960. In December 2003, the United States Forest Service (“USFS”) made a formal request for information to the Company for information regarding the site, to which the Company responded. In February 2007, the USFS made a formal request for information to Callahan for information regarding the site, to which Callahan responded. In April 2013, the USFS made a formal request for information to the Company regarding the site, to which the Company responded on June 10, 2013. Bolivian Temporary Restriction on Mining above 4,400 Meters On October 14, 2009, the Bolivian state-owned mining organization, COMIBOL, announced by resolution that it was temporarily suspending mining activities above the elevation of 4,400 meters above sea level while stability studies of Cerro Rico mountain are undertaken. The Company holds rights to mine above this elevation under valid contracts with COMIBOL as well as under authorized contracts with local mining cooperatives that hold their rights under contract themselves with COMIBOL. The Company temporarily adjusted its mine plan to confine mining activities to the ore deposits below 4,400 meters above sea level and timely notified COMIBOL of the need to lift the restriction. The Cooperative Reserva Fiscal, with which the Company has one of those contracts, subsequently interpreted the COMIBOL resolution and determined that the Huacajchi deposit was not covered by such resolution. In March 2010, the Cooperative Reserva Fiscal notified COMIBOL that, based on its interpretation, it was resuming mining of high grade material above the 4,400 meter level in the Huacajchi deposit. In December 2011, the Cooperative Reserva Fiscal sent a similar notification to COMIBOL with respect to a further area above the 4,400 meter level known as Huacajchi Sur. Based on these notifications and on the absence of any objection from COMIBOL, the Company resumed mining operations at the San Bartolomé mine on the Huacajchi deposit and Huacajchi Sur. Mining in other areas above the 4,400 meter level continues to be suspended. The partial suspension may reduce production until the Company is able to resume mining above 4,400 meters generally. It is uncertain at this time how long the suspension will remain in place. In addition, it is possible that COMIBOL may decide that the Company's operations at the Huacajchi deposit or Huacajchi Sur are subject to the COMIBOL resolution, which may force the Company to cease mining at such deposits. If COMIBOL objects to the Company mining at the Huacajchi deposit or Huacajchi Sur or if the other restrictions are not lifted, the Company may need to write down the carrying value of the asset. It is also uncertain if any new mining or investment policies or shifts in political attitude may affect mining in Bolivia. Appeal of Plan of Operations Amendment at Rochester in Nevada The Rochester property is the subject of an administrative appeal filed by Great Basin Resource Watch (“GBRW”) with the Interior Board of Land Appeals (“IBLA”). This appeal challenges the decision of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”) to approve a plan of operations amendment permitting resumed mining in the existing mine pit and construction of a new heap leach pad. GBRW asserts that the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”) required an Environmental Impact Statement for the plan of operations amendment, as opposed to the Environmental Assessment (“EA”) that was prepared. GBRW further alleges that BLM violated the Federal Land Policy & Management Act (“FLPMA”) by failing to avoid unnecessary and undue degradation of public lands. Because GBRW did not seek a stay of BLM's decision, operations are proceeding as approved. Coeur was granted intervenor status in the appeal and is actively participating in its resolution. The BLM and Coeur assert that the EA complies with NEPA and that BLM complied with FLPMA by, among other things, requiring mitigation of any possible future effects on water quality. BLM filed a Supplemental Briefing on March 1, 2012 regarding additional analysis conducted by the BLM further supporting and strengthening BLM and Coeur's positions that the EA complies with NEPA. The Company cannot predict whether this will result in further briefing with the IBLA, when the IBLA will rule on the appeal or what impact, if any, an adverse ruling may have on Rochester's operations. Settlement of Unpatented Mining Claims Dispute at Rochester in Nevada and 3.4% NSR Royalty In 2011, Coeur Rochester, Inc. (“Coeur Rochester”) filed a lawsuit against Rye Patch Gold Corp and Rye Patch Gold US, Inc. seeking a declaratory judgment as to Coeur Rochester’s ownership of unpatented mining claims surrounding the Coeur Rochester operation. Rye Patch Gold US, Inc. filed a similar action asserting its interest in the claims. The dispute stemmed from competing asserted interests in the mining claims following Coeur Rochester’s inadvertent failure to pay annual mining claim maintenance fees. In the second quarter of 2013, Coeur Rochester settled all claims associated with the dispute and, in connection therewith, agreed to make a one-time $10.0 million cash payment and granted a 3.4% net smelter returns royalty to Rye Patch on production and sales from the Rochester mine, commencing in January 2014, up to 39.4 million silver equivalent ounces. The above settlement resulted in a $32.0 million charge in the second quarter of 2013. Payments on the royalty obligation will occur quarterly reducing the carrying amount of the royalty liability and changes in silver and gold prices will result in the recognition of mark-to-market gains or losses in Fair value adjustments, net in the consolidated statement of operations. Mexican Import Tax During the third quarter of 2013, the Company was notified by Mexican tax authorities of potential penalties arising from an alleged misuse of its import license in Mexico relating to imports of goods in 2008, 2009 and 2011. The Company has a validly-issued Mexican import license, and routinely contracts with third party importers in its ordinary course operating activities. The Mexican authorities claimed that the valid legal formation and existence of one such importer could not be confirmed. Accordingly, the authorities considered the certificates of origin on goods imported by that importer to be invalid, and determined that the origin of those imported goods could not be conclusively established, which resulted in the denial of preferential tariff treatment for all items imported by that third party importer on behalf of the Company and potential interest and penalties payable by the Company in connection therewith. The Company is currently negotiating with Mexican tax authorities to resolve the matter. During the three months ended September 30, 2013, the Company accrued $1.8 million for the potential settlement of these claims. Kensington Production Royalty On July 7, 1995, Coeur, through its wholly-owned subsidiary, Coeur Alaska, Inc., acquired the 50% ownership interest of Echo Bay Exploration Inc., or Echo Bay, giving Coeur 100% ownership of the Kensington property. Coeur Alaska is obligated to pay Echo Bay, a subsidiary of Kinross Gold Corporation, a scaled net smelter return royalty on 1.0 million ounces of future gold production after Coeur Alaska recoups the $32.5 million purchase price and its construction and development expenditures incurred after July 7, 1995 in connection with placing the property into commercial production. The royalty ranges from 1% at gold prices of $400 per ounce to a maximum of 2.5% at gold prices above $475 per ounce, with the royalty to be capped at 1.0 million ounces of production. No royalty has been paid to date. Rochester Production Royalty The Company acquired the Rochester property from ASARCO, a subsidiary of Grupo Mexico SA de CV, in 1983. The Company is obligated to pay a net smelter royalty interest to ASARCO when the market price of silver equals or exceeds $23.60 per ounce up to a maximum rate of 5%. Royalty expense was zero and $0.8 million, respectively for the three months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012, respectively. Royalty expense was $1.0 million and $2.0 million, respectively for the nine months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012, respectively. Palmarejo Gold Production Royalty On January 21, 2009, Coeur Mexicana entered into a gold production royalty transaction with Franco-Nevada Corporation under which Franco-Nevada purchased a royalty covering 50% of the life of mine gold to be produced from its Palmarejo silver and gold mine in Mexico. The royalty agreement provides for a minimum obligation to be paid monthly on a total of 400,000 ounces of gold, or 4,167 ounces per month over an initial eight-year period. As of September 30, 2013, a total of 156,493 ounces of gold remain outstanding under the minimum royalty obligation.

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Sites Related to Callahan Mining Corporation

In 1991, the Company acquired all of the outstanding common stock of Callahan Mining Corporation. Since then, the Company has received requests for information or notices of potential liability from state or federal agencies with regard to Callahan's operations at sites in Idaho, Maine, Colorado and Washington. The Company did not make any decisions with respect to generation, transport or disposal of hazardous waste at these sites. Therefore, the Company believes that it is not liable for any potential cleanup costs either directly as an operator or indirectly as a parent. To date, none of these agencies have made any claims against the Company or Callahan for cleanup costs. The Company anticipates that further agency interaction may be possible with respect to three of these sites, discussed below.

Callahan operated a mine and mill in Brooksville, Maine from 1968 until 1972 and subsequently disposed of the property. In 2000, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA, made a formal request to the Company for information regarding the site. The site was placed on the National Priorities List on September 5, 2002, and the Maine Department of Transportation, a partial owner of the property, signed a consent order in 2005. In January 2009, the EPA and the State of Maine made additional formal requests to the Company for information relating to the site, to which the Company responded. The first phase of cleanup at the site began in April 2011.

The Van Stone Mine in Stevens County, Washington consists of several parcels and was mined from 1926 until 1993. Callahan sold its parcel in 1990. In February 2010, the State of Washington Department of Ecology notified Callahan Mining Corporation that it, among others, is a potentially liable person (PLP) under Washington law. Asarco LLC ("Asarco"), an affiliate of American Smelting and Refining Company, which developed the mill on the site in 1951, settled for $3.5 million. Another potentially liable person, Vaagen Brothers, signed a consent order which allows access to the site for a Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study. Neither the Company nor Callahan Mining Corporation has received any further notices from the Washington Department of Ecology. On June 5, 2012, Asarco filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington against five named defendants, including Callahan Mining Corporation, seeking contribution for the $3.5 million settlement. Callahan Mining Corporation filed a response and defense to the lawsuit on December 11, 2012 and does not believe it has any liability to Asarco. The Court has set a trial date for September 22, 2014. On January 23, 2013, the Court entered an Order dismissing one of the five named defendants from the lawsuit as a result of the parties reaching a settlement.

Callahan controlled the Akron Mine located in Gunnison County, Colorado under lease and option agreements with several owners from 1937-1960. In December 2003, the United States Forest Service (“USFS”) made a formal request for information to the Company for information regarding the site, to which the Company responded. In February 2007, the USFS made a formal request for information to Callahan for information regarding the site, to which Callahan responded. In April 2013, the USFS made a formal request for information to the Company regarding the site, to which the Company responded on June 10, 2013.

Bolivian Temporary Restriction on Mining above 4,400 Meters

On October 14, 2009, the Bolivian state-owned mining organization, COMIBOL, announced by resolution that it was temporarily suspending mining activities above the elevation of 4,400 meters above sea level while stability studies of Cerro Rico mountain are undertaken. The Company holds rights to mine above this elevation under valid contracts with COMIBOL as well as under authorized contracts with local mining cooperatives that hold their rights under contract themselves with COMIBOL. The Company temporarily adjusted its mine plan to confine mining activities to the ore deposits below 4,400 meters above sea level and timely notified COMIBOL of the need to lift the restriction.

The Cooperative Reserva Fiscal, with which the Company has one of those contracts, subsequently interpreted the COMIBOL resolution and determined that the Huacajchi deposit was not covered by such resolution. In March 2010, the Cooperative Reserva Fiscal notified COMIBOL that, based on its interpretation, it was resuming mining of high grade material above the 4,400 meter level in the Huacajchi deposit. In December 2011, the Cooperative Reserva Fiscal sent a similar notification to COMIBOL with respect to a further area above the 4,400 meter level known as Huacajchi Sur. Based on these notifications and on the absence of any objection from COMIBOL, the Company resumed mining operations at the San Bartolomé mine on the Huacajchi deposit and Huacajchi Sur. Mining in other areas above the 4,400 meter level continues to be suspended.

The partial suspension may reduce production until the Company is able to resume mining above 4,400 meters generally. It is uncertain at this time how long the suspension will remain in place. In addition, it is possible that COMIBOL may decide that the Company's operations at the Huacajchi deposit or Huacajchi Sur are subject to the COMIBOL resolution, which may force the Company to cease mining at such deposits. If COMIBOL objects to the Company mining at the Huacajchi deposit or Huacajchi Sur or if the other restrictions are not lifted, the Company may need to write down the carrying value of the asset. It is also uncertain if any new mining or investment policies or shifts in political attitude may affect mining in Bolivia.

Appeal of Plan of Operations Amendment at Rochester in Nevada

The Rochester property is the subject of an administrative appeal filed by Great Basin Resource Watch (“GBRW”) with the Interior Board of Land Appeals (“IBLA”). This appeal challenges the decision of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”) to approve a plan of operations amendment permitting resumed mining in the existing mine pit and construction of a new heap leach pad. GBRW asserts that the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”) required an Environmental Impact Statement for the plan of operations amendment, as opposed to the Environmental Assessment (“EA”) that was prepared. GBRW further alleges that BLM violated the Federal Land Policy & Management Act (“FLPMA”) by failing to avoid unnecessary and undue degradation of public lands. Because GBRW did not seek a stay of BLM's decision, operations are proceeding as approved. Coeur was granted intervenor status in the appeal and is actively participating in its resolution. The BLM and Coeur assert that the EA complies with NEPA and that BLM complied with FLPMA by, among other things, requiring mitigation of any possible future effects on water quality. BLM filed a Supplemental Briefing on March 1, 2012 regarding additional analysis conducted by the BLM further supporting and strengthening BLM and Coeur's positions that the EA complies with NEPA. The Company cannot predict whether this will result in further briefing with the IBLA, when the IBLA will rule on the appeal or what impact, if any, an adverse ruling may have on Rochester's operations.

Settlement of Unpatented Mining Claims Dispute at Rochester in Nevada and 3.4% NSR Royalty

In 2011, Coeur Rochester, Inc. (“Coeur Rochester”) filed a lawsuit against Rye Patch Gold Corp and Rye Patch Gold US, Inc. seeking a declaratory judgment as to Coeur Rochester’s ownership of unpatented mining claims surrounding the Coeur Rochester operation. Rye Patch Gold US, Inc. filed a similar action asserting its interest in the claims. The dispute stemmed from competing asserted interests in the mining claims following Coeur Rochester’s inadvertent failure to pay annual mining claim maintenance fees. In the second quarter of 2013, Coeur Rochester settled all claims associated with the dispute and, in connection therewith, agreed to make a one-time $10.0 million cash payment and granted a 3.4% net smelter returns royalty to Rye Patch on production and sales from the Rochester mine, commencing in January 2014, up to 39.4 million silver equivalent ounces. The above settlement resulted in a $32.0 million charge in the second quarter of 2013. Payments on the royalty obligation will occur quarterly reducing the carrying amount of the royalty liability and changes in silver and gold prices will result in the recognition of mark-to-market gains or losses in Fair value adjustments, net in the consolidated statement of operations.

Mexican Import Tax

During the third quarter of 2013, the Company was notified by Mexican tax authorities of potential penalties arising from an alleged misuse of its import license in Mexico relating to imports of goods in 2008, 2009 and 2011. The Company has a validly-issued Mexican import license, and routinely contracts with third party importers in its ordinary course operating activities. The Mexican authorities claimed that the valid legal formation and existence of one such importer could not be confirmed. Accordingly, the authorities considered the certificates of origin on goods imported by that importer to be invalid, and determined that the origin of those imported goods could not be conclusively established, which resulted in the denial of preferential tariff treatment for all items imported by that third party importer on behalf of the Company and potential interest and penalties payable by the Company in connection therewith. The Company is currently negotiating with Mexican tax authorities to resolve the matter. During the three months ended September 30, 2013, the Company accrued $1.8 million for the potential settlement of these claims.

Kensington Production Royalty

On July 7, 1995, Coeur, through its wholly-owned subsidiary, Coeur Alaska, Inc., acquired the 50% ownership interest of Echo Bay Exploration Inc., or Echo Bay, giving Coeur 100% ownership of the Kensington property. Coeur Alaska is obligated to pay Echo Bay, a subsidiary of Kinross Gold Corporation, a scaled net smelter return royalty on 1.0 million ounces of future gold production after Coeur Alaska recoups the $32.5 million purchase price and its construction and development expenditures incurred after July 7, 1995 in connection with placing the property into commercial production. The royalty ranges from 1% at gold prices of $400 per ounce to a maximum of 2.5% at gold prices above $475 per ounce, with the royalty to be capped at 1.0 million ounces of production. No royalty has been paid to date.

Rochester Production Royalty

The Company acquired the Rochester property from ASARCO, a subsidiary of Grupo Mexico SA de CV, in 1983. The Company is obligated to pay a net smelter royalty interest to ASARCO when the market price of silver equals or exceeds $23.60 per ounce up to a maximum rate of 5%. Royalty expense was zero and $0.8 million, respectively for the three months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012, respectively. Royalty expense was $1.0 million and $2.0 million, respectively for the nine months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

Palmarejo Gold Production Royalty

On January 21, 2009, Coeur Mexicana entered into a gold production royalty transaction with Franco-Nevada Corporation under which Franco-Nevada purchased a royalty covering 50% of the life of mine gold to be produced from its Palmarejo silver and gold mine in Mexico. The royalty agreement provides for a minimum obligation to be paid monthly on a total of 400,000 ounces of gold, or 4,167 ounces per month over an initial eight-year period. As of September 30, 2013, a total of 156,493 ounces of gold remain outstanding under the minimum royalty obligation.