A TRACK DEV AT LAX; NV; WHEN THE FILED AND READBACK DEP WAS NOT WHAT THE CTLR THOUGHT WAS BEING FLOWN.

Narrative

OUR COMPANY ISSUED A NOTAM TO NOT ACCEPT RNAV DEPS TILL FURTHER ADVISED. BEFORE DEP FROM LAS; CAPT AND MYSELF DISCUSSED NOTAM AND NOTED OUR COMPANY FLT PLAN WAS FILED USING THE LAS 1 DEP (NON RNAV) AND ENTERED SAME IN THE FMC. BECAUSE PDC WAS NOT AVAILABLE; I CALLED CLRNC DELIVERY AND WAS ISSUED 'CLRED TO PHL VIA AACES 1 (RNAV) TO DVC A/F MAINTAIN 7000 FT DEP FREQ 125.9; SQUAWK XXXX.' I THOUGHT I READ BACK 'LAS 1 DVC ETC' AND ASKED CTLR TO CONFIRM READBACK. CTLR SAID 'READBACK CORRECT.' IN THE FUTURE; WHEN PDC IS NOT AVAILABLE; I WILL TURN SPEAKER ON AND HAVE CAPT MONITOR THE CLRNC AND READBACK! NO CONFLICTS OCCURRED. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR'S COMPANY HAS DECIDED THAT SINCE THERE IS A RESTR THAT REQUIRES THE UPDATING OF THE 'NAV SYS AT A KNOWN LOCATION WITHIN 30 MINS PRIOR TO TKOF' THAT THEIR CREWS MAY NOT ACCEPT THE RNAV DEPS UNTIL THERE IS A LOCATION PRINTED ON THE CHART THAT THEY CAN USE AS A REF TO USE AT THE END OF THE RWY. THE CREW BECAME CONCERNED WHEN A VECTOR HDG WAS NOT OFFERED AFTER A REASONABLE DELAY ON RWY HDG AND THEY WERE BEGINNING TO DIVERGE FROM THE ASSIGNED COURSE AS INDICATED ON THE LAS 1 DEP. THE DEP CTLR SEEMED UNCONCERNED ABOUT THE TRACK UNTIL QUERIED BY THE CREW. AT THAT POINT THE DISPLACEMENT FROM THE AACES RNAV 1 DEP TRACK WAS ESTIMATED TO BE 2 1/2 - 3 MI.