Narrative:

After selecting flaps 1 during the after start flow we noticed the amber leading edge flap transit light remained illuminated. On the overhead leading edge devices panel; the number 6 slat was illuminated amber. We returned to the gate and contacted dispatch and conferenced with maintenance control. Contract maintenance was called. Contract maintenance discovered a proximity sensor fault. Maintenance control instructed contract maintenance to apply MEL (leading edge slat indications). After waiting for almost an hour for contract maintenance to apply the MEL I queried the two technicians. It was immediately obvious to me that both techs had a limited grasp of spoken english and were having difficulty communicating with both maintenance control and myself. Over the next hour and seven different phone calls with maintenance control; I assisted the contract maintenance techs with the application of the MEL. Once I was satisfied with the MEL compliance and after receiving my new dispatch release I noticed an asterisked phrase below the MEL which read: '* MEL: manual input may be require for FMC cost index; climb; cruise and descent speeds.'I consulted the MEL and could not find this verbiage. The MEL contained five (5) different notes regarding different aspects of the MEL; but none related to this verbiage. This necessitated (in my opinion) an additional consultation with maintenance control as well as the chief pilot on call to ascertain the significance/relevance of the statement and to ensure it was applicable to this particular MEL.after pushback and selection of flaps 1 we noticed we did not have the green le flaps ext light. We rationalized the light was not illuminated due to the fact the number 6 slat on the overhead le device panel was still illuminated (in accordance with the MEL procedure). However; there was no mention in the MEL that this was to be expected. This necessitated (once again) an additional consultation with maintenance control to confirm our conclusion.we then departed without incident and complied with the speed restrictions as directed in the MEL and the last note of the MEL: 'with FMC update 10.7 or later; VNAV will limit the speed target to 230 KIAS unless speed intervention is used.' during the VNAV descent; we did have to use speed intervention to preclude the FMC limiting the target speed to 230 KIAS. The use of speed intervention during the descent caused the FMA to alternate between VNAV path while level to VNAV speed during descents. Each descent in VNAV speed was at the rate you would experience had you selected 'lvl chg' on the MCP. It was disconcerting and increased our workload to ensure compliance with the speeds and altitudes on the STAR. There is no reference note in the MEL alerting crews to this issue.1. The ability to effectively communicate verbally with our contract maintenance tech is essential for the proper application of any MEL. There must be provisions in place requiring any contract maintenance tech to be able to effectively communicate verbally using the english language.2. Any note that is placed after the MEL on the dispatch release should either be a complete stand-alone thought or should be contained in the body of the MEL procedure for crews to reference.3. Within the body of this particular MEL and as an added note on the dispatch release it should be specifically addressed that the green le flaps ext light will not illuminate when flaps are extended.4. Within the body of this particular MEL and as an added note on the dispatch release it should be specifically addressed that the use of VNAV path descents may be problematic due to the use of speed intervention.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B737NG Captain reported that the MEL verbiage did not alert the crew of the increased workload due to the deferment of the leading edge slat indication.

Narrative: After selecting flaps 1 during the after start flow we noticed the amber Leading Edge Flap Transit light remained illuminated. On the overhead leading edge devices panel; the number 6 slat was illuminated amber. We returned to the gate and contacted Dispatch and conferenced with Maintenance Control. Contract Maintenance was called. Contract Maintenance discovered a proximity sensor fault. Maintenance Control instructed Contract Maintenance to apply MEL (Leading Edge Slat Indications). After waiting for almost an hour for Contract Maintenance to apply the MEL I queried the two Technicians. It was immediately obvious to me that both Techs had a limited grasp of spoken English and were having difficulty communicating with both Maintenance Control and myself. Over the next hour and seven different phone calls with Maintenance Control; I assisted the Contract Maintenance Techs with the application of the MEL. Once I was satisfied with the MEL compliance and after receiving my new Dispatch Release I noticed an asterisked phrase below the MEL which read: '* MEL: MANUAL INPUT MAY BE REQUIRE FOR FMC COST INDEX; CLIMB; CRUISE AND DESCENT SPEEDS.'I consulted the MEL and could not find this verbiage. The MEL contained five (5) different notes regarding different aspects of the MEL; but none related to this verbiage. This necessitated (in my opinion) an additional consultation with Maintenance Control as well as the Chief Pilot on Call to ascertain the significance/relevance of the statement and to ensure it was applicable to this particular MEL.After pushback and selection of flaps 1 we noticed we did not have the green LE Flaps EXT light. We rationalized the light was not illuminated due to the fact the number 6 slat on the overhead LE device panel was still illuminated (in accordance with the MEL procedure). However; there was no mention in the MEL that this was to be expected. This necessitated (once again) an additional consultation with Maintenance Control to confirm our conclusion.We then departed without incident and complied with the speed restrictions as directed in the MEL and the last note of the MEL: 'With FMC update 10.7 or later; VNAV will limit the speed target to 230 KIAS unless Speed Intervention is used.' During the VNAV descent; we did have to use Speed Intervention to preclude the FMC limiting the target speed to 230 KIAS. The use of Speed Intervention during the descent caused the FMA to alternate between VNAV PATH while level to VNAV SPEED during descents. Each descent in VNAV SPEED was at the rate you would experience had you selected 'LVL CHG' on the MCP. It was disconcerting and increased our workload to ensure compliance with the speeds and altitudes on the STAR. There is no reference note in the MEL alerting Crews to this issue.1. The ability to effectively communicate verbally with our Contract Maintenance Tech is essential for the proper application of any MEL. There must be provisions in place requiring any Contract Maintenance Tech to be able to effectively communicate verbally using the English language.2. Any note that is placed after the MEL on the Dispatch Release should either be a complete stand-alone thought or should be contained in the body of the MEL procedure for Crews to reference.3. Within the body of this particular MEL AND as an added note on the Dispatch Release it should be specifically addressed that the green LE Flaps EXT light will not illuminate when flaps are extended.4. Within the body of this particular MEL AND as an added note on the Dispatch Release it should be specifically addressed that the use of VNAV PATH descents may be problematic due to the use of Speed Intervention.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.