ARCHIVED - Letter
This page has been archived on the Web
Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. Archived Decisions, Notices and Orders (DNOs) remain in effect except to the extent they are amended or reversed by the Commission, a court, or the government. The text of archived information has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Changes to DNOs are published as “dashes” to the original DNO number. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats by contacting us.
File No.: 8665-C12-201303536
By e-mail
Sorenson Communications and Sorenson Communications of Canada, ULC
c/o Gregory Kane, Q.C
Dentons Canada LLP
99 Bank Street, Suite 1420
Ottawa, ON K1P 1H4
Greg.kane@dentons.com
Re: Issues related to the feasibility of establishing a video relay service Telecom Notice of Consultation CRTC 2013-155
We have received and reviewed your intervention to Telecom Notice of Consultation CRTC 2013-155. Commission staff notes that in paragraph 64, Sorenson Communications and Sorenson Communications of Canada, ULC (Sorenson) has requested the disclosure of aggregated data filed in response to the 27 March 2013 and 25 May 2012 requests for information pertaining to Message Relay Service (MRS). Staff notes that additional requests for information were later sent to companies on 10 June 2013, for the purpose of clarifying the responses to those requests for information.
Commission staff provides the following aggregated data in response to this request. Please contact Kay Saicheua (kay.saicheua@crtc.gc.ca) at (819) 934-1358 should you have any questions in regard to this letter.
Yours sincerely,
ORIGINAL SIGNED BY/
Nanao Kachi
Director, Social and Consumer Policy
The following section provides aggregated data of all companies that responded to the aforementioned requests for information. Please note that the statistics presented reflect the numbers as filed. Results have been rounded. Numbers have not been adjusted to account for differences in record keeping practices. Message Relay Service (MRS) refers to TTY and IP relay combined.
Aggregated MRS Financial Data
$ Millions |
2008 |
2009 |
2010 |
2011 |
2012 |
Revenue |
$ 32 |
$ 31 |
$ 33 |
$ 33 |
$ 24 |
Expenditure |
$ 13 |
$ 14 |
$ 19 |
$ 18 |
$ 14 |
Notes:
1) ‘Revenue’ includes draw downs from the Deferral Account to cover IPRS implementation costs. The associated costs are also included in ‘Expenditure’.
2) Certain companies submitted that they did not impute or assess an MRS rate to their customers. In this instance, no revenues were included in the calculation for these companies; however, MRS expenditures were included in the calculation for these companies.
The following section provides aggregated data for companies that responded to the aforementioned requests for information. Certain companies submitted that MRS call data or traffic were not accurately tracked. The statistics presented here have been adjusted to account for differences in record keeping practices. Results have been rounded.
Aggregate MRS Call Data
Millions |
2008 |
2009 |
2010 |
2011 |
2012 |
Total Number of MRS-relayed calls |
2.3 |
2.0 |
1.8 |
1.5 |
1.3 |
Total Number of minutes of conversation relayed |
11.9 |
10.6 |
9.2 |
7.7 |
6.7 |
Note:
1) Results for 2010 onwards include IP relay
2) Results for 2008-2010 have been adjusted to account for changes in reporting for certain companies
Percentage of traffic by day of week (based on number of calls)
|
Sunday |
Monday |
Tuesday |
Wednesday |
Thursday |
Friday |
Saturday |
|
TTY |
2011 |
10% |
16% |
16% |
16% |
16% |
15% |
11% |
2012 |
9% |
17% |
17% |
17% |
16% |
16% |
9% |
|
IP relay |
2011 |
5% |
18% |
19% |
17% |
19% |
17% |
6% |
2012 |
7% |
17% |
18% |
18% |
17% |
16% |
7% |
Note:
1) Results prior to 2011 are not available
2) Sum of percentages may not equal 100 due to rounding
Percentage of traffic by time of day (based on number of calls)
|
Session 1 |
Session 2 |
Session 3 |
Session 4 |
|
TTY |
2011 |
2% |
35% |
42% |
22% |
2012 |
2% |
34% |
42% |
21% |
|
IP relay |
2011 |
1% |
43% |
44% |
12% |
2012 |
2% |
39% |
45% |
14% |
Note:
1) Results prior to 2011 are not available
2) Sum of percentages may not equal 100 due to rounding
- Date modified: