Narrative:

I was the PF. As we approached the airport, I began to slow and called for flaps 2 degrees, then flaps 5 degrees. Approximately 5-10 mi from the ILS OM, I called for flaps 10 degrees but realized that the flaps and leading edge devices were still in the full up position despite the flap handle in the 10 degree position. The first officer notified the tower that we were going to climb to an altitude of 4000 ft while we worked on the problem. Tower provided vectors to keep us circling. No circuit breakers were found out and both 'a' and 'B' hydraulic system were normal, but the flaps did not respond to any of the flap handle movements. Flaps 0 degree was selected and the first officer pulled out the manual. Using the alternate flap operation checklist, we found that the alternate flap system was working and lowered the flaps to 10 degrees. We notified dispatch and maintenance. Both recommended using the alternate method and landing in ZZZ. Fuel on board about this time was 4.6 (about 1000 pounds above the 45 min reserve of 3.6). I reviewed the landing performance data for the runway and realized that a 15 degree flaps landing was not possible on this runway. I called dispatch again for other options. Since no other (longer runways) options were immediately available and fuel was running low, I decided to land in ZZZ with flaps at 30 degrees. This landing condition using the alternate flap procedure is not recommended due to the diminished go around performance. I determined that the safest course of action was to land with 30 degrees flaps and accept any diminished performance in the unlikely event that we would have to go around. I declared an emergency to use captain's authority/authorized. The approach and landing were normal and uneventful. Fuel on board on arrival was 3.5 or about 40 mins.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B737-300 CREW HAD THE LEADING EDGE FLAPS AND SLATS STAY IN THE RETRACTED POS WHEN THE FLAP HANDLE WAS EXTENDED. DID NOT COMPLY WITH RECOMMENDED FLAP SETTING FOR LNDG.

Narrative: I WAS THE PF. AS WE APCHED THE ARPT, I BEGAN TO SLOW AND CALLED FOR FLAPS 2 DEGS, THEN FLAPS 5 DEGS. APPROX 5-10 MI FROM THE ILS OM, I CALLED FOR FLAPS 10 DEGS BUT REALIZED THAT THE FLAPS AND LEADING EDGE DEVICES WERE STILL IN THE FULL UP POS DESPITE THE FLAP HANDLE IN THE 10 DEG POS. THE FO NOTIFIED THE TWR THAT WE WERE GOING TO CLB TO AN ALT OF 4000 FT WHILE WE WORKED ON THE PROB. TWR PROVIDED VECTORS TO KEEP US CIRCLING. NO CIRCUIT BREAKERS WERE FOUND OUT AND BOTH 'A' AND 'B' HYD SYS WERE NORMAL, BUT THE FLAPS DID NOT RESPOND TO ANY OF THE FLAP HANDLE MOVEMENTS. FLAPS 0 DEG WAS SELECTED AND THE FO PULLED OUT THE MANUAL. USING THE ALTERNATE FLAP OP CHKLIST, WE FOUND THAT THE ALTERNATE FLAP SYS WAS WORKING AND LOWERED THE FLAPS TO 10 DEGS. WE NOTIFIED DISPATCH AND MAINT. BOTH RECOMMENDED USING THE ALTERNATE METHOD AND LNDG IN ZZZ. FUEL ON BOARD ABOUT THIS TIME WAS 4.6 (ABOUT 1000 LBS ABOVE THE 45 MIN RESERVE OF 3.6). I REVIEWED THE LNDG PERFORMANCE DATA FOR THE RWY AND REALIZED THAT A 15 DEG FLAPS LNDG WAS NOT POSSIBLE ON THIS RWY. I CALLED DISPATCH AGAIN FOR OTHER OPTIONS. SINCE NO OTHER (LONGER RWYS) OPTIONS WERE IMMEDIATELY AVAILABLE AND FUEL WAS RUNNING LOW, I DECIDED TO LAND IN ZZZ WITH FLAPS AT 30 DEGS. THIS LNDG CONDITION USING THE ALTERNATE FLAP PROC IS NOT RECOMMENDED DUE TO THE DIMINISHED GAR PERFORMANCE. I DETERMINED THAT THE SAFEST COURSE OF ACTION WAS TO LAND WITH 30 DEGS FLAPS AND ACCEPT ANY DIMINISHED PERFORMANCE IN THE UNLIKELY EVENT THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO GO AROUND. I DECLARED AN EMER TO USE CAPT'S AUTH. THE APCH AND LNDG WERE NORMAL AND UNEVENTFUL. FUEL ON BOARD ON ARR WAS 3.5 OR ABOUT 40 MINS.

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.