Narrative:

Pushed back from gate X. When we extended the flaps to position 1 we got a flap transit light on and a #2 slat transit light illuminating on the overhead panel. We attempted to recycle the flaps to solve the anomaly to no avail. Contacted dispatch and maintenance control and deferred the problem with MEL 27-4-04. Complying with the MEL; we applied sections a; B; and C of the MEL. Part D of MEL 27-4-04 states; 'with forward position indicator lights inoperative and one slats annunciator panel light inoperative perform the following:....' and; part D has nine steps to be followed in this situation. However; we interpreted that the forward position indicator lights were actually operative because they were properly lit indicating what they were designed to do which is to indicate an anomaly with the flap/slat positioning system. Subsequently; we decided that part D of MEL 27-4-04 was not applicable in this situation and we did not do steps 1-9 of part D.when we arrived in XXX; I called dispatch and maintenance control again to give maintenance a logbook page and get a MEL tracking number. I was then informed that maintenance control's interpretation of MEL 27-4-04 in this situation included part D of the MEL. Maintenance control said that since the flap transit light was on in this situation was an anomaly and that the light was considered inoperative. I disagreed and subsequently spoke to chief pilot on call who agreed with my interpretation of the MEL. He suggested; however; that I comply with part D of the procedure because it wouldn't hurt to do so and to submit an irregularity report to highlight this MEL.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: The pilots of a B737-300 experienced a leading edge disagree fault on pushback. When they were provided the MEL reference and authorization for the issue; they concluded that only some of the MEL steps were required. At the next station the situation was discussed with Maintenance Control who advised that the entire MEL procedure should be accomplished.

Narrative: Pushed back from Gate X. When we extended the flaps to position 1 we got a Flap Transit light on and a #2 Slat Transit light illuminating on the overhead panel. We attempted to recycle the flaps to solve the anomaly to no avail. Contacted Dispatch and Maintenance Control and deferred the problem with MEL 27-4-04. Complying with the MEL; we applied sections A; B; and C of the MEL. Part D of MEL 27-4-04 states; 'With forward position indicator lights inoperative and one SLATS annunciator panel light inoperative perform the following:....' And; Part D has nine steps to be followed in this situation. However; we interpreted that the forward position indicator lights were actually operative because they were properly lit indicating what they were designed to do which is to indicate an anomaly with the flap/slat positioning system. Subsequently; we decided that Part D of MEL 27-4-04 was not applicable in this situation and we did not do steps 1-9 of Part D.When we arrived in XXX; I called Dispatch and Maintenance Control again to give Maintenance a logbook page and get a MEL tracking number. I was then informed that Maintenance Control's interpretation of MEL 27-4-04 in this situation included Part D of the MEL. Maintenance Control said that since the Flap Transit light was on in this situation was an anomaly and that the light was considered inoperative. I disagreed and subsequently spoke to Chief Pilot on Call who agreed with my interpretation of the MEL. He suggested; however; that I comply with Part D of the procedure because it wouldn't hurt to do so and to submit an Irregularity Report to highlight this MEL.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 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.