Narrative:

First officer's #1 outer window pane cracked at cruise altitude. Applicable checklist was accomplished per procedure. As a precaution, I requested and was given a lower cruise altitude. At this point, I casually informed ATC that the reason for the descent was the cracked window. I never requested priority handling, nor did I declare an emergency. Later during the flight, ATC requested my fuel and number of souls on board. I complied with the requests and notified ATC that everything was normal and that I needed no assistance. About 1 hour after landing, I was paged by my dispatcher who informed me that the FAA presumed that I had declared an emergency. I told him that I had not and, in fact, never used the word 'emergency' on the radio. I then contacted my chief pilot and informed him of the situation. It is my opinion that if ATC believes that an emergency exists, the controller (at least one of them) should verify this fact with the flight crew. This was a pure case of improper assumption and miscom.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ATC DECLARES AN EMER FOR A B737-200 FLT THAT SIMPLY WANTED LOWER ALT TO CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CHKLIST FOR A CRACKED OUTER FO'S WINDOW.

Narrative: FO'S #1 OUTER WINDOW PANE CRACKED AT CRUISE ALT. APPLICABLE CHKLIST WAS ACCOMPLISHED PER PROC. AS A PRECAUTION, I REQUESTED AND WAS GIVEN A LOWER CRUISE ALT. AT THIS POINT, I CASUALLY INFORMED ATC THAT THE REASON FOR THE DSCNT WAS THE CRACKED WINDOW. I NEVER REQUESTED PRIORITY HANDLING, NOR DID I DECLARE AN EMER. LATER DURING THE FLT, ATC REQUESTED MY FUEL AND NUMBER OF SOULS ON BOARD. I COMPLIED WITH THE REQUESTS AND NOTIFIED ATC THAT EVERYTHING WAS NORMAL AND THAT I NEEDED NO ASSISTANCE. ABOUT 1 HR AFTER LNDG, I WAS PAGED BY MY DISPATCHER WHO INFORMED ME THAT THE FAA PRESUMED THAT I HAD DECLARED AN EMER. I TOLD HIM THAT I HAD NOT AND, IN FACT, NEVER USED THE WORD 'EMER' ON THE RADIO. I THEN CONTACTED MY CHIEF PLT AND INFORMED HIM OF THE SIT. IT IS MY OPINION THAT IF ATC BELIEVES THAT AN EMER EXISTS, THE CTLR (AT LEAST ONE OF THEM) SHOULD VERIFY THIS FACT WITH THE FLC. THIS WAS A PURE CASE OF IMPROPER ASSUMPTION AND MISCOM.

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.