CAPT REFUSED TO FLY MLG WITH INOP ALT ALERTER.

Narrative

CAPT WAS SCHEDULED TO FLY FROM DTW-ATL. AFTER CONFIRMING WITH MEL; WX AND FLT PLANNING DATA THAT ACFT WAS LEGAL TO DEPART DTW; THE ACFT WAS FLOWN TO ATL PER SCHEDULE. AFTER ARRIVING ATL; MAINT PULLED LOGBOOK AND FOUND THAT ACFT COULD NOT BE DISPATCHED OUT OF ALT MAINT BASE WITH ALT ALERTER INOP ON MEL. ATL MAINT COULD NOT REPAIR OR REPLACE ALT ALERTER PRIOR TO SCHEDULED DEP TIME. THE CAPT TALKED WITH DISPATCHER ABOUT THE SITUATION. A FEW MINS LATER IN A CONFERENCE CALL WITH DISPATCHER AND SUPVR OF MAINT CTL; SUPVR SAID HE HAD GOTTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM SOMEONE REPUTED TO BE AN FAA MAINT INSPECTOR IN MSP TO DEPART ATL WITH INOP ALT ALERTER ON MEL; ABROGATING THE DISPATCH LIMIT OF THE ACFT MEL. AT THAT TIME THE CAPT ADVISED BOTH DISPATCH AND MAINT THAT HE WOULD NOT ACCEPT SUCH A RELEASE AND THE FLT DISPATCHER CONCURRED THAT HE WOULD STAND WITH THE CAPT ON THAT DECISION. CAPT ADVISED THAT HE WOULD ACCEPT A MAINT FERRY IF THE PROPER PERMITS WERE ISSUED BY MAINT CTL (PER FLT OPERATIONS MANUAL). AT THIS TIME. SUPVR OF MAINT CTL REFUSED TO ISSUE A MAINT FERRY PERMIT; STATING THAT HE FELT THAT A VERBAL AUTHORIZATION FROM FAA INSPECTOR WAS A WAY TO LEGALLY DISPATCH THE FLT. CAPT AND DISPATCHER DID NOT CONCUR. ATL OPERATIONS GETS A REQUEST FOR THE CAPT TO CALL COMPANY SUPVR. HE ADVISED CAPT HE WAS LEGAL TO LEAVE ATL WITH PAX PER FAA INSPECTOR'S VERBAL AUTHORIZATION. AS MAINT CTL HAD DEMANDED; THE CAPT DECLINED TO ACCEPT SUCH A RELEASE; BUT AGAIN OFFERED TO MAINT FERRY THE ACFT PER FLT OPERATIONS MANUAL. ATL OPERATIONS GETS A REQUEST FOR CAPT TO CALL A CHIEF PLT. THE CAPT COMPLIED WITH REQUEST AND TALKED TO CHIEF PLT FOR APPROX 10 MINS. CHIEF PLT ASKED THE CAPT TO ACCEPT THE RELEASE AS PER MAINT CTL MESSAGE. CAPT DECLINED SUCH REQUEST CITING MEL LIMITATIONS AS WELL AS SAFETY CONCERNS REGARDING FLT DIR MEL AND AUTOPLT WRITE UP. THE ACFT RON IN ATL MAINT BASE WITH CAPT AND CREW.