Narrative:

We were cleared for ILS runway 25L at lax. WX was clear, with a 1 degree temperature dewpoint spread. We had just heard over ATC that san diego was below minimums and dispatch had just sent us data for using ont as an alternate, as we were dispatched alternate none. We could see the fog just offshore at lax. Passing fueler, at 26 DME, we were slowed to 210 KTS from 250 KTS previously assigned. Passing 230 KTS I asked for flaps 1 degree. We got an EICAS message 'leading edge slat disagree,' and an amber leading edge light. There had been a previous identical write-up the day before. I checked fuel, we had 12500 pounds. I told the first officer that we would continue the approach, I would fly and talk, he would do the abnormal checklist and if we completed the checklists with no problems we would land, otherwise we would miss approach and work it out in holding. I declared an emergency with approach, and we switched to runway 25R. I felt overloaded with the MCP so I disengaged the autoplt and flew a visual approach. At this point I was comfortable knowing that even if I had to land no flap/no slat I would be ok on this 11000 ft runway, but I did not want to go into holding and work through checklists only to have the fog roll in and do an actual IFR approach or land at ontario, where I had never been before. I extended the landing gear and held clean minimum maneuver speed. ATC kept pumping us for souls aboard, and I could hear first officer saying set vref 20 KTS and do a no flap no slat, which didn't sound good. I told ATC to call dispatch for that information, we were too busy. I told first officer to look at the bugs and the pli (pitch limit indicator), which was sitting maybe 5 degrees above the airplane symbol, and that vref 20 bug speeds wouldn't work. When he said no flap no slat checklist, speed vref 30 plus 50, and we can land on 6500 ft of runway. I didn't think we needed to land no flap no slat, but I knew we could without any problem, and by now we were on tower frequency, about 10 mi out and stabilized on the ILS. I landed with autobrakes 4 selected. Landing and rollout were uneventful. The 'B757 leading edge slat disagree' procedure has the question, 'is indicated flap position greater than 20 degrees.' the 'no' answer leads you to a box in which line 1 reads, 'use existing flaps and set vref 20 for landing.' I think the wording was the source of first officer's confusion. It sounds like the '...for landing' phrase refers to using existing flaps. In previous write-up the crew had said they performed a flap 1 degree landing, and maybe they were confused by the same thing.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B757 CREW HAS LEADING EDGE SLAT ASYMMETRY WARNING, DECLARES EMER AND LANDS WITHOUT FLAPS AFTER FINDING BOOK PROCS CONFUSING, FUEL SHORT AND WX CLOSING IN.

Narrative: WE WERE CLRED FOR ILS RWY 25L AT LAX. WX WAS CLR, WITH A 1 DEG TEMP DEWPOINT SPREAD. WE HAD JUST HEARD OVER ATC THAT SAN DIEGO WAS BELOW MINIMUMS AND DISPATCH HAD JUST SENT US DATA FOR USING ONT AS AN ALTERNATE, AS WE WERE DISPATCHED ALTERNATE NONE. WE COULD SEE THE FOG JUST OFFSHORE AT LAX. PASSING FUELER, AT 26 DME, WE WERE SLOWED TO 210 KTS FROM 250 KTS PREVIOUSLY ASSIGNED. PASSING 230 KTS I ASKED FOR FLAPS 1 DEG. WE GOT AN EICAS MESSAGE 'LEADING EDGE SLAT DISAGREE,' AND AN AMBER LEADING EDGE LIGHT. THERE HAD BEEN A PREVIOUS IDENTICAL WRITE-UP THE DAY BEFORE. I CHKED FUEL, WE HAD 12500 LBS. I TOLD THE FO THAT WE WOULD CONTINUE THE APCH, I WOULD FLY AND TALK, HE WOULD DO THE ABNORMAL CHKLIST AND IF WE COMPLETED THE CHKLISTS WITH NO PROBS WE WOULD LAND, OTHERWISE WE WOULD MISS APCH AND WORK IT OUT IN HOLDING. I DECLARED AN EMER WITH APCH, AND WE SWITCHED TO RWY 25R. I FELT OVERLOADED WITH THE MCP SO I DISENGAGED THE AUTOPLT AND FLEW A VISUAL APCH. AT THIS POINT I WAS COMFORTABLE KNOWING THAT EVEN IF I HAD TO LAND NO FLAP/NO SLAT I WOULD BE OK ON THIS 11000 FT RWY, BUT I DID NOT WANT TO GO INTO HOLDING AND WORK THROUGH CHKLISTS ONLY TO HAVE THE FOG ROLL IN AND DO AN ACTUAL IFR APCH OR LAND AT ONTARIO, WHERE I HAD NEVER BEEN BEFORE. I EXTENDED THE LNDG GEAR AND HELD CLEAN MINIMUM MANEUVER SPD. ATC KEPT PUMPING US FOR SOULS ABOARD, AND I COULD HEAR FO SAYING SET VREF 20 KTS AND DO A NO FLAP NO SLAT, WHICH DIDN'T SOUND GOOD. I TOLD ATC TO CALL DISPATCH FOR THAT INFO, WE WERE TOO BUSY. I TOLD FO TO LOOK AT THE BUGS AND THE PLI (PITCH LIMIT INDICATOR), WHICH WAS SITTING MAYBE 5 DEGS ABOVE THE AIRPLANE SYMBOL, AND THAT VREF 20 BUG SPDS WOULDN'T WORK. WHEN HE SAID NO FLAP NO SLAT CHKLIST, SPD VREF 30 PLUS 50, AND WE CAN LAND ON 6500 FT OF RWY. I DIDN'T THINK WE NEEDED TO LAND NO FLAP NO SLAT, BUT I KNEW WE COULD WITHOUT ANY PROB, AND BY NOW WE WERE ON TWR FREQ, ABOUT 10 MI OUT AND STABILIZED ON THE ILS. I LANDED WITH AUTOBRAKES 4 SELECTED. LNDG AND ROLLOUT WERE UNEVENTFUL. THE 'B757 LEADING EDGE SLAT DISAGREE' PROC HAS THE QUESTION, 'IS INDICATED FLAP POS GREATER THAN 20 DEGS.' THE 'NO' ANSWER LEADS YOU TO A BOX IN WHICH LINE 1 READS, 'USE EXISTING FLAPS AND SET VREF 20 FOR LNDG.' I THINK THE WORDING WAS THE SOURCE OF FO'S CONFUSION. IT SOUNDS LIKE THE '...FOR LNDG' PHRASE REFERS TO USING EXISTING FLAPS. IN PREVIOUS WRITE-UP THE CREW HAD SAID THEY PERFORMED A FLAP 1 DEG LNDG, AND MAYBE THEY WERE CONFUSED BY THE SAME THING.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.