Date: 201301
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ELP.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Aircraft component: Flap/Slat Indication
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Second reporter function: First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Maintenance
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; MEL
Primary problem: Procedure

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.


Second narrative: After pushback from the gate; we had an amber Flap Transit light as well as an amber #2 Slat Transit light on the overhead panel when flaps were set to 1 for takeoff. We called Maintenance; accomplished Crew placard procedures; and continued the flight. Upon arrival in XXX; the Captain followed up with Dispatch/Maintenance. We were told that we had not followed all sections of the Crew placard/MEL procedures. Maintenance was confused about our exact problem and wanted us to comply with forward Flap Transit light problem; but our problem was 'overhead' Slat Transit light improper indication. We went ahead and accomplished all checklist items for Maintenance while on the phone with them and finished MEL procedures. MEL was 27-04-04 was slat number 2.


Synopsis: 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.