A coalition of electronics recycling promoters are disputing the Retina MacBook Pro's newly minted EPEAT "Gold" status, noting that the industrial-strength glue holding the battery in place runs afoul of rules designed to make computers easier to recycle. It turns out that the Gold rating was handed to Apple by none other than Apple itself, though EPEAT can require Apple to remove the rating after evaluating its assessment of standard criteria.

Apple had originally decided to remove its products from the voluntary EPEAT green product registry in early July, claiming its design direction was "no longer consistent with EPEAT requirements." The company said that its own internal standards exceeded those of EPEAT, which haven't been updated in several years. But Apple backpedaled on those assertions last week, rejoining the green device standards group and calling its pull-out a "mistake."

"We’ve recently heard from many loyal Apple customers who were disappointed to learn that we had removed our products from the EPEAT rating system. I recognize that this was a mistake. Starting today, all eligible Apple products are back on EPEAT," Senior VP of Product Engineering Bob Mansfield wrote in an open letter on Apple's website published July 13.

While Apple added back the previously approved products, it also added its latest Retina MacBook Pro to the registry, claiming it qualifies for "Gold" status. Products earn a "Bronze" rating if they meet all of the required criteria laid out in the IEEE 1680.1 standard (which Apple helped author in 2006), a "Silver" if those products meet at least half of the 27 optional criteria, or "Gold" if the products meet at least 75 percent of the option criteria.

Some observers believed that the device's engineering, which traded easy repairability for added thinness, was largely responsible for Apple's decision to drop the EPEAT standard in the first place, so its "Gold" rating raised a few eyebrows. Among the skeptics is Barbara Kyle from the Electronics Take Back Coalition. Kyle believes that the extra-strong glue that Apple uses to affix the Retina MacBook Pro's 95 Whr lithium polymer battery to its aluminum unibody makes the laptop unfit for an EPEAT rating of any kind.

"We seriously doubt that these MacBooks should qualify for EPEAT at any level because we think they flunk two required criteria in the 'Design for End of Life' section of the standard," Kyle wrote on the Coalition's blog.

Those criteria are "4.3.1.3 Easy disassembly of external enclosure," and "4.3.1.5 Identification and removal of components containing hazardous materials." Kyle noted that the glue makes the battery difficult to remove "safely," which is "exactly the kind of design that this standard seeks to discourage."

But the rating is less surprising if you consider how EPEAT ratings are awarded. Manufacturers voluntarily register their products with EPEAT, listing which of the required and optional criteria the devices meet. EPEAT then reviews the registration, and can have the rating reduced or removed at its discretion. According to Kyle, EPEAT hasn't yet reviewed Apple's registration for the Retina MacBook Pro, so it could be rescinded.

It would certainly come off as embarrassing for Apple to have the Gold rating stricken from the Retina MacBook Pro after claiming it should qualify. But the company may be counting on EPEAT to grant it some leeway, as EPEAT works with vendors and the IEEE to define updated standards criteria. EPEAT CEO Robert Frisbee said last week that "flexibility within specified parameters" is one way the group could "reward innovations that are not yet envisioned with standards."

Apple declined to comment specifically on how it believes the Retina MacBook Pro meets the EPEAT criteria, but referred us to SVP Mansfield's letter from Friday, which noted that the company in looking forward to "working with EPEAT as their rating system and the underlying IEEE 1680.1 standard evolve."