A B757 crew refused an aircraft because the APU failed the high altitude inflight start verification...

Narrative:

We brought this aircraft in and enroute on that first flight we were required to do an APU high altitude start verification. The APU failed to start. Upon arrival the APU started on the ground. Mechanics met the plane and started working on the problem. As push time approached we were told that boarding would be delayed because of the status of the APU. I proceeded to the ramp where several line mechanics and their supervisor were discussing the APU. I queried them on our status. The supervisor then told the mechanics to stop working on the airplane and told me the captain would have to refuse the aircraft for work to continue. I informed the captain of this and he proceeds to call dispatch and maintenance. The captain was informed by maintenance that he would have to refuse the aircraft in order for work to continue. He refused the aircraft. The local mechanics replaced a part on the APU they thought was the culprit and the APU started and ran normally. We were again asked to do a high altitude start enroute and the APU failed all 3 start attempts. In this scenario the captain felt the APU was necessary for safe completion of the flight based on the potential for marginal weather in our next destination.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B757 crew refused an aircraft because the APU failed the high altitude inflight start verification but operated normally on the the ground. The weather at the next destination was marginal and the Captain wanted the APU operable.

Narrative: We brought this aircraft in and enroute on that first flight we were required to do an APU high altitude start verification. The APU failed to start. Upon arrival the APU started on the ground. Mechanics met the plane and started working on the problem. As push time approached we were told that boarding would be delayed because of the status of the APU. I proceeded to the ramp where several line mechanics and their supervisor were discussing the APU. I queried them on our status. The Supervisor then told the mechanics to stop working on the airplane and told me the Captain would have to refuse the aircraft for work to continue. I informed the Captain of this and he proceeds to call Dispatch and Maintenance. The Captain was informed by Maintenance that he would have to refuse the aircraft in order for work to continue. He refused the aircraft. The local mechanics replaced a part on the APU they thought was the culprit and the APU started and ran normally. We were again asked to do a high altitude start enroute and the APU failed all 3 start attempts. In this scenario the Captain felt the APU was necessary for safe completion of the flight based on the potential for marginal weather in our next destination.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.

Attributes
ACN	917260
Time
Date	201011
Local Time Of Day	0601-1200
Place
Locale Reference	ZZZ.Airport
State Reference	US
Aircraft 1
Make Model Name	B757-200
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	Parked
Component
Aircraft Component	APU
Person 1
Function	First Officer Pilot Not Flying
Experience	Flight Crew Last 90 Days 200 Flight Crew Total 15000 Flight Crew Type 5000
Events
Anomaly	Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence

A B757 crew refused an aircraft because the APU failed the high altitude inflight start verification but operated normally on the the ground. The weather at the next destination was marginal and the captain wanted the APU operable.