CAPT REFUSED ACFT FOR SAFETY CONCERNS. COMPANY REPLACED CAPT WITH ANOTHER WHO DIDN'T HAVE SAME CONCERNS.

Narrative

OPERATED ACR X FLT FROM DENVER TO PHOENIX AS AN AIRBUS A320 CAPT. ENG #1 HAD A HISTORY OF PREVIOUS EGT EXCEEDANCE. I ACCEPTED THE ACFT FOR THIS PARTICULAR FLT DUE TO REASONABLE OUTSIDE TEMPS (APPROX 65 DEGS F) AND LOW GROSS WT -- APPROX 138000 LBS. ALTHOUGH NO EGT EXCEEDANCE OCCURRED ON THIS PARTICULAR TKOF; DUE TO PAST RIGID FAA ENFORCEMENT FOLLOWING V2500 OVERTEMPS I AM FILING THIS RPT. I REFUSED TO FLY THE NEXT LEG PHX-MSP IN THIS ACFT -- SEE ENCLOSED RPT. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR'S MAIN COMPLAINT WAS THE LACK OF ACFT HISTORY INFO; AND SPECIFICALLY; ENG DATA AS RELATED TO TEMPS; WTS; IMPROVED CLB; ETC. WHEN REQUESTING A REPLACEMENT ACFT; NONE WERE AVAILABLE. THE PLANNED TKOF WAS MAX GROSS WT PERFORMANCE LIMITED; PREVIOUS ENG DATA WAS NOT AVAILABLE AND AMBIENT TEMP WAS QUESTIONABLE; THE RPTR REFUSED TO OPERATE THE FLT. HIS DECISION ALSO WAS BASED ON THE FAA'S PREVIOUS STRICT ENFORCEMENT AGAINST OVERTEMP TKOF'S. THEN; AS RPTR SAYS; 'I FIND APPALLING; I WAS REPLACED BY ANOTHER CAPT WHO OPERATED THE TRIP IN THE SAME ACFT IN MY PLACE.' RPTR WROTE TO HIS COMPANY VICE-PRESIDENT FOR FLT OPS AND WAS INVITED TO A MEETING WITH THE SENIOR VICE-PRESIDENT FOR FLT OPS; MECH CAPT REPRESENTATIVE AND THE SAFETY COORDINATOR. RPTR SAYS THE MEETING WAS MOSTLY TO LET HIM 'BLOW OFF STEAM;' BUT THE VICE-PRESIDENT DID REASSURE HIM THAT THEY WOULD IMPROVE THE ENG DATA/TEMP INFO AVAILABILITY. ALSO; A MODIFICATION TO THE ENGS HAS ALL BUT ELIMINATED THE OVERTEMP PROBS. RPTR SAYS THAT HIS JUDGEMENT AS A CAPT SHOULD NOT BE QUESTIONED PARTICULARLY WHEN HE CHOOSES THE MOST CONSERVATIVE AND SAFEST COURSE.