Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 13, 2023 / Notices 62833 

1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

3For example, if the market is 0.98 bid and 0.99 

offer, a Public Customer PRISM Order to buy for 

less than 50 contracts must be stopped at 0.98 cents 

in this scenario to be accepted into a PRISM 

Auction, provided there is no resting order or quote 

on the BX order book at 0.98 in which case the 

PRISM Order would be rejected. 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–98318; File No. SR–BX– 

2023–021] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq 

BX, Inc.; Notice of Filing and 

Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed 

Rule Change To Amend Options 3, 

Section 13 Concerning PRISM 

September 7, 2023. 

Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the 

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 

(‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2

notice is hereby given that on August 

30, 2023, Nasdaq BX, Inc. (‘‘BX’’ or 

‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities 

and Exchange Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule 

change as described in Items I and II 

below, which Items have been prepared 

by the self-regulatory organization. The 

Commission is publishing this notice to 

solicit comments on the proposed rule 

change from interested persons. 

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Terms of Substance of 

the Proposed Rule Change 

The Exchange proposes to amend 

Options 3, Section 13, Price 

Improvement Auction (‘‘PRISM’’). 

The text of the proposed rule change 

is available on the Exchange’s website at 

https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/ 

rulebook/bx/rules, at the principal office 

of the Exchange, and at the 

Commission’s Public Reference Room. 

II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Purpose of, and 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

In its filing with the Commission, the 

Exchange included statements 

concerning the purpose of and basis for 

the proposed rule change and discussed 

any comments it received on the 

proposed rule change. The text of these 

statements may be examined at the 

places specified in Item IV below. The 

Exchange has prepared summaries, set 

forth in sections A, B, and C below, of 

the most significant aspects of such 

statements. 

A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Purpose of, and 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

1. Purpose 

The Exchange proposes to amend 

Options 3, Section 13, Price 

Improvement Auction (‘‘PRISM’’). 

Specifically, the Exchange proposes to 

amend Options 3, Section 13(i)(A) 

through (C) to harmonize the language 

within the PRISM entry checks with 

language within Nasdaq GEMX, LLC’s 

(‘‘GEMX’’) PIM, Nasdaq ISE, LLC’s 

(‘‘ISE’’) PIM, Nasdaq MRX, LLC’s 

(‘‘MRX’’) PIM, and Nasdaq Phlx LLC’s 

(‘‘Phlx’’) PIXL, without changing the 

substantive operations of these price 

improvement auctions. The Exchange 

believes that by utilizing similar 

language, Participants will be able to 

compare BX’s PRISM entry checks with 

similar mechanisms on Nasdaq 

affiliated markets. 

BX proposes to add ‘‘a price that is’’ 

to the end of Options 3, Section 13(i)(A) 

and add new subparagraphs (1) and (2) 

to distinguish opposite and same side 

checks. The opposite side check is 

currently spelled out in the current rule 

text, however the same side check does 

not specify the NBBO check. Today, if 

the PRISM Order is for less than 50 

option contracts, and if the difference 

between the NBBO or the internal BBO 

is $0.01, the Initiating Participant must 

stop the entire PRISM Order at a price 

that is, on the same side of the market 

as the PRISM Order, equal to or better 

than the NBBO 3 and better than any 

Limit Order or quote on the Limit Order 

book. The Exchange believes that the 

addition of the NBBO check will add 

clarity to the rule text concerning same 

side price checks because the NBBO 

check is always relevant in the same 

side check to avoid a trade-through. The 

Exchange also proposes to capitalize 

‘‘Limit Order,’’ and remove other 

extraneous words as the sentence has 

been rearranged. The Exchange notes 

that this rule text represents current 

System functionality. 

The Exchange proposes to amend 

Options 3, Section 13(i)(B) to 

distinguish opposite and same side 

checks and add a semicolon to the end 

of Options 3, Section 13(i)(B). The 

opposite side check is currently spelled 

out in the current rule text, however the 

same side check does not specify the 

NBBO check. Today, if the PRISM Order 

is for the account of a Public Customer 

and such order is for 50 option contracts 

or more, or if the difference between the 

NBBO or the internal BBO is greater 

than $0.01, the Initiating Participant 

must stop the entire PRISM Order at a 

price that is, on the same side of the 

market as the PRISM Order, at least 

$0.01 better than any Limit Order or 

quote on the Limit Order book and 

equal to or better than the NBBO. The 

Exchange believes that the addition of 

the NBBO check will add clarity to the 

rule text because the NBBO check is 

always relevant in the same side check 

to avoid a trade-through. The Exchange 

also proposes to capitalize ‘‘Limit 

Order,’’ and remove other extraneous 

words as the sentence has been 

rearranged. The Exchange notes that this 

rule text represents current System 

functionality. 

The Exchange proposes to amend 

Options 3, Section 13(i)(C) to 

distinguish opposite and same side 

checks and add a semicolon to the end 

of Options 3, Section 13(i)(C). The 

opposite side check is not currently 

delineated in the rule text. The 

Exchange proposes to provide that if the 

PRISM Order is for the account of a 

broker dealer or any other person or 

entity that is not a Public Customer and 

such order is for 50 option contracts or 

more, or if the difference between the 

NBBO or the internal BBO is greater 

than $0.01, the Initiating Participant 

must stop the entire PRISM Order at a 

price that is equal to or better than the 

internal BBO and NBBO on the opposite 

side of the market from the PRISM 

Order. The Exchange notes that this rule 

text represents current System 

functionality. The Exchange also 

proposes to reword the current rule text 

related to the same side check to 

provide that if the PRISM Order is for 

the account of a broker dealer or any 

other person or entity that is not a 

Public Customer and such order is for 

50 option contracts or more, or if the 

difference between the NBBO or the 

internal BBO is greater than $0.01, the 

Initiating Participant must stop the 

entire PRISM Order at a price that is, on 

the same side of the market as the 

PRISM Order, at least $0.01 better than 

any Limit Order or quote on the Limit 

Order book, and equal to or better than 

the NBBO. The Exchange notes that this 

rule text represents current System 

functionality. The current rule text 

indicates that the PRISM Order must be 

stopped at a price that is the better of 

the BX BBO improved by at least $0.01 

or the PRISM Order’s limit price on the 

same side of the market as the PRISM 

Order, provided in either case that such 

price is at or better than the NBBO. 

Because the language is the ‘‘better of’’ 

the Exchange notes that the proposed 

language, which conforms to similar 

language utilized on other Nasdaq 

affiliated markets, describes the same 

price checks and adds the NBBO check 

which is currently missing. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
62834 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 13, 2023 / Notices 

4 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 

5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 

6 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 

7 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b– 

4(f)(6) requires a self-regulatory organization to give 

the Commission written notice of its intent to file 

the proposed rule change at least five business days 

prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule 

change, or such shorter time as designated by the 

Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this 

requirement. 

2. Statutory Basis 

The Exchange believes that its 

proposal is consistent with section 6(b) 

of the Act,4 in general, and furthers the 

objectives of section 6(b)(5) of the Act,5

in particular, in that it is designed to 

promote just and equitable principles of 

trade and to protect investors and the 

public interest. 

The Exchange’s proposal to amend 

Options 3, Section 13(i)(A) through (C) 

to harmonize the language within the 

PRISM entry checks with language 

within GEMX’s PIM, ISE’s PIM, MRX’s 

PIM, and Phlx’s PIXL, without changing 

the substantive operations of these price 

improvement auctions, is consistent 

with the Act and the protection of 

investors and the general public because 

by utilizing similar language 

Participants will be able to compare 

BX’s PRISM entry checks with similar 

mechanisms on Nasdaq affiliated 

markets. 

BX’s proposal to amend Options 3, 

Section 13(i)(A) to distinguish opposite 

and same side checks, and add the 

NBBO check to the same side price 

check is consistent with the Act and the 

protection of investors and the general 

public because the NBBO check is 

always relevant in the same side check 

to avoid a trade-through. The Exchange 

believes that the addition of the NBBO 

check will add clarity to the rule text 

because the NBBO check is always 

relevant in the same side check to avoid 

a trade-through. The remainder of the 

changes are non-substantive. 

BX’s proposal to amend Options 3, 

Section 13(i)(B) to distinguish opposite 

and same side checks, and add the 

NBBO check to the same side price 

check is consistent with the Act and the 

protection of investors and the general 

public because the NBBO check is 

always relevant in the same side check 

to avoid a trade-through. The Exchange 

believes that the addition of the NBBO 

check will add clarity to the rule text 

because the NBBO check is always 

relevant in the same side check to avoid 

a trade-through. The remainder of the 

changes are non-substantive. 

BX’s proposal to amend Options 3, 

Section 13(i)(C) to distinguish opposite 

and same side checks, and add the 

opposite side check to the rule text is 

consistent with the Act and the 

protection of investors and the general 

public. The opposite side check must be 

equal to or better than the NBBO and 

any non-displayed order on the 

Exchange’s order book to avoid a tradethrough. Also, the NBBO check is 

always relevant in the same side check 

to avoid a trade-through. Rewording the 

current rule text related to the same side 

check to provide that if the PRISM 

Order is for the account of a broker 

dealer or any other person or entity that 

is not a Public Customer and such order 

is for 50 option contracts or more, or if 

the difference between the NBBO or the 

internal BBO is greater than $0.01, the 

Initiating Participant must stop the 

entire PRISM Order at a price that is on 

the same side of the market as the 

PRISM Order, at least $0.01 better than 

any Limit Order or quote on the Limit 

Order book, and equal to or better than 

the NBBO is consistent with the Act and 

the protection of investors and the 

general public. The proposed rule text 

describes the same price checks as the 

current rule while conforming the rule 

text to similar language utilized on other 

Nasdaq affiliated markets. Additionally, 

the proposed rule text adds the NBBO 

check which is always relevant in the 

same side check to avoid a tradethrough. The Exchange believes that the 

addition of the NBBO check will add 

clarity to the rule text because the 

NBBO check is always relevant in the 

same side check to avoid a tradethrough. The Exchange notes that this 

rule text represents current System 

functionality. 

B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Burden on Competition 

The Exchange does not believe that 

the proposed rule change will impose 

any burden on competition not 

necessary or appropriate in furtherance 

of the purposes of the Act. 

BX’s proposal to amend Options 3, 

Section 13(i)(A) through (C) to 

harmonize the language within the 

PRISM entry checks with language 

within GEMX’s PIM, ISE’s PIM, MRX’s 

PIM, and Phlx’s PIXL, without changing 

the substantive operations of these price 

improvement auctions, does not impose 

an undue burden on competition 

because market participants will be able 

to compare BX’s PRISM entry checks 

with similar mechanisms on Nasdaq 

affiliated markets. 

Amending Options 3, Section 13(i)(A) 

through (C) to specify the entry checks 

that are utilized by BX’s System today 

to initiate a PRISM does not impose an 

undue burden on competition because 

these checks will apply uniformly to 

any order entered into PRISM. Further, 

the proposed amendments will add 

transparency to the current System 

functionality, which is not being 

substantively amended. 

C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Comments on the 

Proposed Rule Change Received From 

Members, Participants, or Others 

No written comments were either 

solicited or received. 

III. Date of Effectiveness of the 

Proposed Rule Change and Timing for 

Commission Action 

Because the foregoing proposed rule 

change does not (i) significantly affect 

the protection of investors or the public 

interest; (ii) impose any significant 

burden on competition; and (iii) become 

operative for 30 days after the date of 

the filing, or such shorter time as the 

Commission may designate, it has 

become effective pursuant to section 

19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 6 and Rule 19b– 

4(f)(6) thereunder.7

At any time within 60 days of the 

filing of the proposed rule change, the 

Commission summarily may 

temporarily suspend such rule change if 

it appears to the Commission that such 

action is necessary or appropriate in the 

public interest, for the protection of 

investors, or otherwise in furtherance of 

the purposes of the Act. If the 

Commission takes such action, the 

Commission shall institute proceedings 

to determine whether the proposed rule 

should be approved or disapproved. 

IV. Solicitation of Comments 

Interested persons are invited to 

submit written data, views, and 

arguments concerning the foregoing, 

including whether the proposed rule 

change is consistent with the Act. 

Comments may be submitted by any 

of the following methods: 

Electronic Comments 

• Use the Commission’s internet 

comment form (https://www.sec.gov/ 

rules/sro.shtml); or 

• Send an email to rule-comments@

sec.gov. Please include file number SR– 

BX–2023–021 on the subject line. 

Paper Comments 

• Send paper comments in triplicate 

to Secretary, Securities and Exchange 

Commission, 100 F Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20549–1090. 

All submissions should refer to file 

number SR–BX–2023–021. This file 

number should be included on the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 13, 2023 / Notices 62835 

8 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

3See FINRA Rule 12000 Series (Code of 

Arbitration Procedure for Customer Disputes). 

4See FINRA Rule 13000 Series (Code of 

Arbitration Procedure for Industry Disputes). 

5See proposed Rules 12402(b)(3), 12403(a)(4), 

13403(a)(5), 13403(b)(5). 

6See proposed Rules 12407(a), 13410(a). 

7Unless the Codes provide otherwise, the DRS 

Director may delegate their duties when it is 

appropriate. FINRA Rule 12103 (Director of FINRA 

Dispute Resolution Services). 

8See proposed Rules 12407(c), 13410(c). 

subject line if email is used. To help the 

Commission process and review your 

comments more efficiently, please use 

only one method. The Commission will 

post all comments on the Commission’s 

internet website (https://www.sec.gov/ 

rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the 

submission, all subsequent 

amendments, all written statements 

with respect to the proposed rule 

change that are filed with the 

Commission, and all written 

communications relating to the 

proposed rule change between the 

Commission and any person, other than 

those that may be withheld from the 

public in accordance with the 

provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be 

available for website viewing and 

printing in the Commission’s Public 

Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20549, on official 

business days between the hours of 10 

a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also 

will be available for inspection and 

copying at the principal office of the 

Exchange. Do not include personal 

identifiable information in submissions; 

you should submit only information 

that you wish to make available 

publicly. We may redact in part or 

withhold entirely from publication 

submitted material that is obscene or 

subject to copyright protection. All 

submissions should refer to file number 

SR–BX–2023–021 and should be 

submitted on or before October 4, 2023. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.8

Sherry R. Haywood, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2023–19730 Filed 9–12–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[SEC File No. 270–156, OMB Control No. 

3235–0288] 

Submission for OMB Review; 

Comment Request; Extension: Form 

20–F 

Upon Written Request Copies Available 

From: Securities and Exchange 

Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 

100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 

20549–2736 

Notice is hereby given that, pursuant 

to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities 

and Exchange Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’) has submitted to the 

Office of Management and Budget this 

request for extension of the previously 

approved collection of information 

discussed below. 

Form 20–F (17 CFR 249.220f) is used 

to register securities of foreign private 

issuers pursuant to Section 12 of the 

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 

(‘‘Exchange Act’’) (15 U.S.C. 78l) or as 

annual and transitional reports pursuant 

to Sections 13 and 15(d) of the Exchange 

Act (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) and 78o(d)). The 

information required in the Form 20–F 

is used by investors in making 

investment decisions with respect to the 

securities of such foreign private 

issuers. We estimate that Form 20–F 

takes approximately 2,629.92 hours per 

response and is filed by approximately 

729 respondents. We estimate that 25% 

of the 2,629.92 hours per response 

(657.48 hours) is prepared by the issuer 

for a total reporting burden of 479,303 

(657.48 hours per response × 729 

responses). 

An agency may conduct or sponsor, 

and a person is not required to respond 

to, a collection of information unless it 

displays a currently valid control 

number. 

The public may view background 

documentation for this information 

collection at the following website: 

www.reginfo.gov. Find this particular 

information collection by selecting 

‘‘Currently under 30-day Review—Open 

for Public Comments’’ or by using the 

search function. Written comments and 

recommendations for the proposed 

information collection should be sent 

within 30 days of publication of this 

notice by October 13, 2023 to (i) 

www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain 

and (ii) David Bottom, Director/Chief 

Information Officer, Securities and 

Exchange Commission, c/o John 

Pezzullo, 100 F Street, NE, Washington, 

DC 20549, or by sending an email to: 

PRA_Mailbox@sec.gov. 

Dated: September 8, 2023. 

Sherry R. Haywood, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2023–19792 Filed 9–12–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–98317; File No. SR–FINRA– 

2022–033] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; 

Financial Industry Regulatory 

Authority, Inc.; Order Granting 

Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, 

as Modified by Amendment No. 1, To 

Amend the Codes of Arbitration 

Procedure To Make Various Clarifying 

and Technical Changes to the Codes, 

Including in Response to 

Recommendations in the Report of 

Independent Counsel Lowenstein 

Sandler LLP 

September 7, 2023. 

I. Introduction 

On December 23, 2022, the Financial 

Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. 

(‘‘FINRA’’) filed with the Securities and 

Exchange Commission (‘‘SEC’’ or 

‘‘Commission’’), pursuant to Section 

19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act 

of 1934 (‘‘Exchange Act’’) 1 and Rule 

19b–4 thereunder,2 a proposed rule 

change to amend the Code of Arbitration 

Procedure for Customer Disputes 3

(‘‘Customer Code’’) and the Code of 

Arbitration Procedure for Industry 

Disputes 4 (‘‘Industry Code’’) (together, 

‘‘Codes’’). The proposed rule change, as 

modified by Amendment No. 1 (defined 

below), would amend provisions of the 

Codes governing the arbitrator listselection process to: (1) exclude 

arbitrators from the arbitrator ranking 

lists based on certain conflicts of 

interest; 5 (2) permit the removal of an 

arbitrator for cause at any point after 

receipt of the arbitrator ranking lists 

until the first hearing session begins; 6

and (3) provide parties with a written 

explanation of the decision by the 

Director of FINRA Dispute Resolution 

Services (‘‘DRS Director’’) 7 to grant or 

deny a request to remove an arbitrator.8

In addition, the proposed rule change, 

as modified by Amendment No. 1, 

would amend procedural rules in the 

Codes, such as those pertaining to 

holding prehearing conferences and 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1