A320 Captain reported refusing an aircraft because metal fragments were found in the engine oil.

Narrative

Upon arrival at Gate XX we were informed by our gate agent that our airplane was waiting on maintenance. When we boarded the airplane the PCA (Aircraft Preconditioned Air Unit) was connected but not running so I called Operations for ramp to come over and turn it on. The APU was running providing power; but not air. Already knowing the tail; I radioed local maintenance to see if we could run the bleed air and asked them if they had an ETA the logbook would be ready. I was told that they were waiting to complete the logbook; but there was no ETA when that would be. Not too long after that another mechanic arrived at the plane and I asked him what the issue was and were told that the previous week they had found metal chips in the engine oil and after a subsequent inspection that night they had recovered additional metal fragments from the aft sump; but the inspection procedure they had been operating under did not give any guidance about what to do in the event they found metal in the subsequent inspection. That was what they were waiting for from engineering. The mechanic also showed us a picture of what I believe he said was the first set of fragment they had recovered the previous week. The fragments were laid out on a grid to show their relative size. He said they believe they were from a bearing in the #1 engine based on the studies that had been done on them. After being informed that engineering had approved an additional inspection schedule I formally initiated the procedure I was questioning the safety of the aircraft. I had previously initiating the procedure with my original dispatcher; but at the request of her supervisor we all decided to wait for the engineer's decision before pulling that trigger. I spoke the Chief Pilot where we had a professional discussion about the situation but ultimately decided to wait until I had the logbook so I could review the history of the airplane as best I could. One question I did get from the Chief Pilot was would my decision to refuse the plane change if I hadn't been informed by the local mechanic about the actual condition of the engine." I found this question to be disturbing for obvious reasons. Once the logbook arrived I review the last few pages to find that the plane had been operating on a deferral for the #1 EMCD (Electronic Master Chip Detector) and that deferral had been cleared. It looked as if that was the deferral that was used when the metal fragments were originally discovered. I phoned Maintenance Control to verify and to ask if; since the airplane had required inspections before each takeoff under the original MEL; would continue to be the case. After reviewing his information he said it would not. Moving forward under the new guidance from manual they weren't required to inspect it again for and additional 50-70 flight hours. This didn't appear to add-up since there were 2 known occasions in a matter of 1 week where metal fragments were found in the engine oil . The timeline looked like the #1 EMCD tripped and the corrective action was to defer the #1 EMCD. At some point shortly after metal fragments were recovered and sent in for analyses. Over the course of a few days recurring inspections of the #1 EMCD were conducted and signed-off on. Then on night of Day 0 additional metal fragments were found in the aft sump and the corrective action was to close out the #1 EMCD deferral and put in place a different inspection protocol that didn't have anyone look again for another 50-70 flight hours. This was not adding up since on multiple occasions metal fragments had been found. I again refused the aircraft as the safety of the aircraft was in doubt. As we concluded the conference call between myself; dispatch; and the Chief Pilot one of them told the other to just replace the crew as we ended the call. My observation of the events of this report is that the integrity of the schedule was the number one priority - to the complete exclusion of safety. As the pilot in command; my assessment of the aircraft maintenance history; MEL application; and discussions with maintenance technicians regarding the presence of metal shavings indicated by the chip detector was completely disregarded. I was unable to legally or ethically sign the dispatch release guaranteeing the safe operation of flight - and dispatch's answer was to find someone else who would. The fact that I was actually asked "if you didn't know what you know about the engine history; would that change your decision" is preposterous. In my XX years as an airline pilot; I have never refused an aircraft before. I do not take it lightly. The complete disregard for the checks and balances of safety is extraordinarily troubling."