Narrative:

[We had an] uneventful flight up to the takeoff event. Approximately two seconds after takeoff thrust was achieved we received a master caution light and an aft entry door light on the overhead panel. I initiated a rejected takeoff (rejected takeoff) and complied with the boxed/memory items. Along with the first officer and a company pilot on the jumpseat; we all concurred the maximum airspeed achieved was 58 KTS. I called for the rejected takeoff checklist in the QRH and the first officer informed the tower of our aborted takeoff and we would not need assistance. We completed the rejected takeoff checklist and the brake performance review; which indicated no brake cooling or logbook inspection requirements (9.1 million ft/pounds of energy). We taxied clear of the runway and parked on the tarmac still without the use of the parking brake. I explained the situation to the passengers; sent an ACARS to my dispatcher; and contacted the flight attendants on the service interphone. I had the 'B' flight attendant recycle the aft entry door and the door light remained extinguished. We accomplished the before push; before taxi; and before takeoff checklists. Additionally; we reviewed the door light checklist and emphasized we would not abort on the subsequent takeoff for a door light above 80 KTS. There was no mechanical problem with the aircraft after the aft entry door was cycled; thus; no need to return to the gate for maintenance. The subsequent takeoff and flight was uneventful. While enroute; my dispatcher sent an ACARS stating that maintenance control might want an information only writeup in the logbook about the door upon arrival. Upon shutdown in the operations agent informed me there was a contract mechanic in the jetway to inspect the aft entry door. Maintenance control; on their initiative; sent the mechanic to inspect the door. I contacted maintenance control through my dispatcher and informed them there was nothing mechanically wrong with the door. The maintenance controller indicated he wanted an information only writeup in the logbook about the door light since we aborted the takeoff. I referenced fom information only item actions and informed him that this situation did not qualify for an information only writeup. He politely requested that I get an opinion from the chief pilot. I explained the situation to the chief pilot and he agreed that all of my actions taken were appropriate and that a pilot logbook entry was not required. Maintenance control had the contract mechanic inspect the door anyway and document the inspection in the logbook. The logbook writeup was something to the effect of; 'per maintenance control's request; an inspection of the aft entry door was performed in accordance with MM XXXX. No defects noted.' the contract mechanic signed off his own writeup and we departed. The chief pilot requested that I complete this report. An irregularity report was also completed. I suppose since rejected takeoffs are very rare and highly scrutinized by the FAA; an abundance of caution exists in [the] maintenance and dispatch [of aircraft]. Possibly the maintenance controller confused this situation with an information only writeup resulting from an erroneous takeoff warning that activates on takeoff. If a logbook entry had been required; I understand that it would have been accomplished before departure. The contract mechanic waiting on us in could have given someone the incorrect appearance that we departed with a defective entry door. That was not the case. I did not mind having the door inspected; even though that was not required; I just disagreed that this situation fell under the criteria of an information only writeup.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B737-700 Captain rejected a takeoff at 58 KTS because of Master Caution and Aft Entry Door lights. Both lights extinguished so the QRH was consulted and a normal takeoff followed.

Narrative: [We had an] uneventful flight up to the takeoff event. Approximately two seconds after takeoff thrust was achieved we received a Master Caution light and an Aft Entry Door light on the overhead panel. I initiated a Rejected Takeoff (RTO) and complied with the boxed/memory items. Along with the First Officer and a Company Pilot on the jumpseat; we all concurred the maximum airspeed achieved was 58 KTS. I called for the RTO Checklist in the QRH and the First Officer informed the Tower of our aborted takeoff and we would not need assistance. We completed the RTO Checklist and the brake performance review; which indicated no brake cooling or logbook inspection requirements (9.1 million FT/LBS of energy). We taxied clear of the runway and parked on the tarmac still without the use of the parking brake. I explained the situation to the passengers; sent an ACARS to my Dispatcher; and contacted the flight attendants on the Service interphone. I had the 'B' Flight Attendant recycle the Aft Entry Door and the door light remained extinguished. We accomplished the Before Push; Before Taxi; and Before Takeoff Checklists. Additionally; we reviewed the Door Light Checklist and emphasized we would not abort on the subsequent takeoff for a door light above 80 KTS. There was no mechanical problem with the aircraft after the Aft Entry door was cycled; thus; no need to return to the gate for maintenance. The subsequent takeoff and flight was uneventful. While enroute; my Dispatcher sent an ACARS stating that Maintenance Control might want an information only writeup in the logbook about the door upon arrival. Upon shutdown in the Operations Agent informed me there was a contract Mechanic in the jetway to inspect the aft entry door. Maintenance Control; on their initiative; sent the Mechanic to inspect the door. I contacted Maintenance Control through my Dispatcher and informed them there was nothing mechanically wrong with the door. The Maintenance Controller indicated he wanted an information only writeup in the logbook about the door light since we aborted the takeoff. I referenced FOM Information Only Item Actions and informed him that this situation did not qualify for an information only writeup. He politely requested that I get an opinion from the Chief Pilot. I explained the situation to the Chief Pilot and he agreed that all of my actions taken were appropriate and that a pilot logbook entry was not required. Maintenance Control had the Contract Mechanic inspect the door anyway and document the inspection in the logbook. The logbook writeup was something to the effect of; 'Per Maintenance Control's request; an inspection of the Aft Entry Door was performed in accordance with MM XXXX. No defects noted.' The Contract Mechanic signed off his own writeup and we departed. The Chief Pilot requested that I complete this report. An Irregularity Report was also completed. I suppose since Rejected Takeoffs are very rare and highly scrutinized by the FAA; an abundance of caution exists in [the] maintenance and dispatch [of aircraft]. Possibly the Maintenance Controller confused this situation with an information only writeup resulting from an erroneous takeoff warning that activates on takeoff. If a logbook entry had been required; I understand that it would have been accomplished before departure. The Contract Mechanic waiting on us in could have given someone the incorrect appearance that we departed with a defective entry door. That was not the case. I did not mind having the door inspected; even though that was not required; I just disagreed that this situation fell under the criteria of an information only writeup.

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.