67400 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 188 / Friday, September 29, 2023 / Notices 

32See Notice, supra note 4, 88 FR at 30989. 

33 17 CFR 242.608(b)(2)(i). 

34Rule 700(c)(2) of the Commission’s Rules of 

Practice provides that ‘‘[t]he Commission, in its sole 

discretion, may determine whether any issues 

relevant to approval or disapproval would be 

facilitated by the opportunity for an oral 

presentation of views.’’ 17 CFR 201.700(c)(2). 

35 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(85). 

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

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

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

4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). 

arguments with respect to the issues 

identified above, as well as any other 

comments or concerns they may have 

regarding the proposal. In particular, the 

Commission invites the written views of 

interested persons concerning whether 

the proposal is consistent with Section 

11A or any other provision of the Act, 

or the rules and regulations thereunder, 

and the Commission asks that 

commenters address the sufficiency and 

merit of OPRA’s statements in support 

of the Proposed Amendment.32

Although there do not appear to be 

any issues relevant to approval or 

disapproval that would be facilitated by 

an oral presentation of views, data, and 

arguments, the Commission will 

consider, pursuant to Rule 608(b)(2)(i) 

of Regulation NMS,33 any request for an 

opportunity to make an oral 

presentation.34

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– 

OPRA–2023–01 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–OPRA–2023–01. This file 

number should be included on the 

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 Participants’ principal 

offices. 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–OPRA–2023–01 

and should be submitted on or before 

October 20, 2023. Rebuttal comments 

should be submitted by November 3, 

2023. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.35

Sherry R. Haywood, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2023–21349 Filed 9–28–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–98511; File No. SR–CBOE– 

2023–053] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe 

Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and 

Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed 

Rule Change To Amend Its Automated 

Price Improvement Auction Rules 

September 25, 2023. 

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

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the 

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

notice is hereby given that on 

September 20, 2023, Cboe Exchange, 

Inc. (the ‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘Cboe 

Options’’) filed with the Securities and 

Exchange Commission (the 

‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule 

change as described in Items I and II 

below, which Items have been prepared 

by the Exchange. The Exchange filed the 

proposal as a ‘‘non-controversial’’ 

proposed rule change pursuant to 

Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 3 and 

Rule 19b–4(f)(6) thereunder.4 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 

Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ‘‘Exchange’’ 

or ‘‘Cboe Options’’) proposes to amend 

its automated price improvement 

auction rules. The text of the proposed 

rule change is provided in Exhibit 5. 

The text of the proposed rule change 

is also available on the Exchange’s 

website (http://www.cboe.com/ 

AboutCBOE/

CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at 

the Exchange’s Office of the Secretary, 

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 

provisions in Rule 5.37 (Automated 

Price Improvement Mechanism (‘‘AIM’’ 

or ‘‘AIM Auction’’)) and Rule 5.38 

(Complex Automated Improvement 

Mechanism (‘‘C–AIM’’ or ‘‘C–AIM 

Auction’’)) regarding concurrent AIM 

and C–AIM Auctions, respectively. The 

Exchange also proposes to update the 

provisions in those Rules regarding the 

permissible stop price. 

By way of background, Rules 5.37 and 

5.38 contain the requirements 

applicable to the execution of orders 

using AIM and C–AIM, respectively. 

The AIM and C–AIM auctions are 

electronic auctions intended to provide 

orders that Trading Permit Holders 

(‘‘TPHs’’) represent as agent (‘‘Agency 

Orders’’) with opportunities to receive 

price improvement (over the National 

Best Bid or Offer (‘‘NBBO’’) in AIM, or 

the synthetic best bid or offer (‘‘SBBO’’) 

on the Exchange in C–AIM). Upon 

submitting an Agency Order into an 

AIM or C–AIM auction, the initiating 

Trading Permit Holder (‘‘Initiating 

TPH’’) must also submit a contra-side 

second order (‘‘Initiating Order’’) for the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 188 / Friday, September 29, 2023 / Notices 67401 

5See generally Rules 5.37(e) and 5.38(e). 

6See Rules 5.37(a) and 5.38(a), respectively. 

7See Rules 5.37(c)(1) (which provides that if 

there is more than one AIM Auction in a series 

underway at a time, those auctions will conclude 

sequentially based on the exact time each auction 

commenced, including if they are terminated early 

pursuant to Rule 5.37(d)); and Rule 5.38(c)(1)(B) 

and (C) (which provides that if there is more than 

one C–AIM Auction in a complex strategy 

underway at a time, those auctions will conclude 

sequentially based on the exact time each auction 

commenced, including if they are terminated early 

pursuant to Rule 5.38(d)). 

8See, e.g., NYSE American LLC (‘‘NYSE 

American’’) Rule 971.1NYP(c) (as recently 

amended) (see Securities Exchange Act Release No. 

97938 (July 18, 2023), 88 FR 47536 (July 24, 2023) 

(SR–NYSEAMER–2023–35) (permitting concurrent 

simple price improvement auctions). 

9See, e.g., NYSE American Rule 971.1NYP, 

Commentary .01; BOX Exchange LLC (‘‘BOX’’) 

Rules 7150, IM–7150–1 and 7245, IM–7245–2; and 

Nasdaq ISE, LLC (‘‘ISE’’) Options 3, Sections 11(g) 

and 13, Supplementary Material .04. 

10The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 

5.37(b)(1) to require the stop price be at least one 

minimum increment better than the then-current 

NBBO if the NBBO width equals the minimum 

increment rather than $0.01. The purpose of this 

provision is to require this price improvement if the 

width of the NBBO is as narrow as possible. 

However, if the minimum increment for a class is, 

for example, $0.05, it would not be possible to price 

improve penny-wide market in the permissible 

minimum increment of $0.05. The proposed rule 

change will ensure that smaller-sized orders receive 

this price improvement when the NBBO is as 

narrow as possible, as intended. 

same size as the Agency Order. The 

Initiating Order guarantees that the 

Agency Order will receive an execution 

at no worse than the auction price (i.e., 

acts as a stop). During an AIM or C–AIM 

Auction, market participants may 

submit responses to trade against the 

Agency Order. At the end of an auction, 

depending on the contra-side interest 

available, the Initiating Order may be 

allocated a certain percentage of the 

Agency Order.5

An Initiating TPH may initiate an 

AIM or C–AIM auction provided that 

the Agency Order is in a class and of 

sufficient size as determined by the 

Exchange.6 Upon receipt of an Agency 

Order, the AIM or C–AIM auction 

process commences. Currently, under 

Rule 5.37(c)(1), for Agency Orders for 

less than 50 standard option contracts 

(or 500 mini-option contracts or 5,000 

micro-option contracts), only one AIM 

Auction may be ongoing at any given 

time in a series, and AIM Auctions in 

the same series may not queue or 

overlap in any manner. One or more 

AIM Auctions in the same series for 

Agency Orders of 50 standard option 

contracts (or 500 mini-option contracts 

or 5,000 micro-option contracts) or more 

may occur at the same time. The 

Exchange proposes amending Rule 

5.37(c)(1) to allow one or more AIM 

Auctions in the same series to occur at 

the same time for Agency Orders for less 

than 50 standard option contracts (or 

500 mini-option contracts or 5,000 

micro-option contracts). This would 

effectively allow for one or more AIM 

Auctions in the same series to occur at 

the same time for orders of all sizes. 

Concurrent AIM Auctions for these 

smaller-sized orders will occur in the 

same manner as concurrent AIM 

Auctions for orders of 50 or more 

contracts occur today.7

Similarly, under current Rule 

5.38(c)(1)(A), with respect to Agency 

Orders for which the smallest leg is less 

than 50 standard option contracts (or 

500 mini-option contracts or 5,000 

micro-option contracts), only one C– 

AIM Auction may be ongoing at any 

given time in a complex strategy, and C– 

AIM Auctions in the same complex 

strategy may not queue or overlap in 

any manner. One or more C–AIM 

Auctions in the same complex strategy 

for Agency Orders for which the 

smallest leg is 50 standard option 

contracts (or 500 mini-option contracts 

or 5,000 micro-option contracts) or more 

may occur at the same time. The 

Exchange proposes amending Rule 

5.38(c)(1)(A) to allow one or more C– 

AIM Auctions in a complex strategy to 

occur at the same time for Agency 

Orders for which the smallest leg is less 

than 50 standard option contracts (or 

500 mini-option contracts or 5,000 

micro-option contracts). This would 

effectively allow for one or more C–AIM 

Auctions in the same complex strategy 

to occur at the same time for complex 

orders of all sizes. The Exchange 

believes this proposed functionality will 

allow more AIM Auctions in the same 

series and more C–AIM Auctions in the 

same complex strategy to be conducted, 

thereby increasing opportunities for 

price improvement on the Exchange to 

the benefit of all market participants. 

Currently, if an Agency Order of fewer 

than 50 contracts (or 500 mini-option 

contracts or 5,000 micro-option 

contracts) is submitted to AIM or C– 

AIM while an AIM or C–AIM Auction 

is in progress, the Agency order is 

rejected. The proposal to add concurrent 

AIM and C–AIM Auctions for Agency 

Orders of any size, including for Agency 

Orders of fewer than 50 contracts (or 

500 mini-option contracts or 5,000 

micro-option contracts), would also 

prevent the rejection of these smaller 

Agency Orders that occurs when such 

smaller Agency Orders are submitted 

while an AIM or C–AIM Auction is in 

progress. By eliminating this rejection 

scenario, the Exchange would increase 

execution and price improvement 

opportunities for these smaller Agency 

orders to the benefit of investors. 

The Exchange notes that allowing 

more than one price improvement 

auction at a time in the same series for 

paired agency orders of fewer than 50 

contracts is not new or novel and is 

current functionality on at least one 

other options exchange.8 While the 

Exchange is unaware of another options 

exchange that offers concurrent price 

improvement auctions for orders in 

complex strategies for which the 

smallest leg is fewer than 50 contracts, 

other options exchanges (as well as the 

Exchange) permit simple price 

improvement auctions to occur 

simultaneously with complex price 

improvement auctions for complex 

strategies involving the same series, 

with no size restrictions.9 Having 

simple price improvement auctions in 

multiple legs of a complex strategy in 

progress at the same time as a complex 

price improvement auction for that 

complex strategy for orders of any size 

is similar to two complex price 

improvement auctions in the same 

complex strategy being in progress at 

the same time. Additionally, the 

benefits of allowing concurrent price 

improvement auctions for simple orders 

of all sizes and complex strategies with 

50 contracts in the smallest leg or more 

(as described above) would apply to 

concurrent price improvement auctions 

for complex strategies with fewer than 

50 contracts in the smallest leg. 

Specifically, allowing concurrent C– 

AIM Auctions in the same complex 

strategy if the smallest leg has fewer 

than 50 contracts would benefit 

investors because it would afford 

smaller-sized complex orders increased 

opportunities to solicit price-improving 

auction interest. The Exchange further 

believes this proposed change would 

provide additional benefits to 

customers, as smaller-sized orders tend 

to represent retail interest, and could 

improve the customer experience on the 

Exchange by increasing trading 

opportunities in the C–AIM Auctions. 

The proposal to allow concurrent AIM 

and C–AIM Auctions for Agency Orders 

for less than 50 contracts (or 500 minioption contracts or 5,000 micro-option 

contracts) in the same series or complex 

strategy, respectively, would benefit 

investors because it would afford 

smaller-sized Agency Orders increased 

opportunities for price improvement, 

including because such smaller Agency 

Orders would no longer be rejected if 

submitted while an AIM or C–AIM 

Auction is in progress. 

The Exchange will continue to protect 

smaller-sized simple Agency Orders in 

minimum increment-wide 10 markets by 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
67402 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 188 / Friday, September 29, 2023 / Notices 

11See Rule 5.37(b)(1). The proposed rule change 

continues to provide price improvement assurances 

for those for buy (sell) Agency Orders submitted for 

AIM Auction processing with less than 50 standard 

option contracts (or 500 mini-option contracts or 

5,000 micro-option contracts) and NBBO width of 

$0.01, pursuant to Rule 5.37(b)(1)(A), which 

remains unchanged. 

12See Rule 5.38(b)(1). 

13 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 

14 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 

15 Id. 

16See supra note 8. 17See supra note 12. 

requiring price improvement of at least 

one minimum increment for such orders 

and rejecting such orders in minimum 

increment-wide markets that do not 

provide for such price improvement.11

Additionally, the Exchange will 

continue to protect Priority Customers 

on the Simple Book by requiring price 

improvement of at least one minimum 

increment better than the SBBO if the 

applicable side of the BBO on any 

component of the complex Agency 

Order complex strategy represents a 

Priority Customer on the Simple Book.12

These protections would apply when 

the proposed concurrent Auctions are 

occurring. Thus, the Exchange believes 

this proposed change should allow the 

Exchange to better compete for auctionrelated order flow that may lead to an 

increase in Exchange volume, while 

continuing to ensure that displayed 

customer interest on the Book is 

protected, to the benefit of all market 

participants. 

The Exchange believes that its System 

has sufficient capacity to process a large 

volume of concurrent AIM and C–AIM 

Auctions for Agency Orders of any size, 

including for Agency Orders of fewer 

than 50 contracts (or 500 mini-option 

contracts or 5,000 micro-option 

contracts). 

Additionally, the Exchange proposes 

to amend Rule 5.38(c)(1)(B) related to 

early termination priority in the event of 

concurrent AIM and C–AIM Auctions. 

Currently, if the System receives a 

simple order that causes AIM and C– 

AIM (or multiple AIM and/or C–AIM) 

Auctions to end in early termination, 

the System first processes AIM Auctions 

(in price-time priority) and then 

processes C–AIM Auctions (in pricetime priority). The Exchange proposes 

to update Rule 5.38(c)(1)(B) to provide 

for the processing of early terminations 

in time priority in these instances. 

Under the proposed rule, if the System 

receives a simple order that causes AIM 

and C–AIM (or multiple AIM and/or C– 

AIM) Auctions to end in early 

termination, the System will continue to 

first process AIM Auctions (sequentially 

based on the exact time each AIM 

Auction commenced) and then process 

C–AIM Auctions (sequentially based on 

the exact time each C–AIM Auction 

commenced), which is consistent with 

the priority the System processes 

concurrent AIM Auctions and 

concurrent C–AIM Auctions. 

2. Statutory Basis 

The Exchange believes the proposed 

rule change is consistent with the 

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the 

‘‘Act’’) and the rules and regulations 

thereunder applicable to the Exchange 

and, in particular, the requirements of 

Section 6(b) of the Act.13 Specifically, 

the Exchange believes the proposed rule 

change is consistent with the Section 

6(b)(5) 14 requirements that the rules of 

an exchange be designed to prevent 

fraudulent and manipulative acts and 

practices, to promote just and equitable 

principles of trade, to foster cooperation 

and coordination with persons engaged 

in regulating, clearing, settling, 

processing information with respect to, 

and facilitating transactions in 

securities, to remove impediments to 

and perfect the mechanism of a free and 

open market and a national market 

system, and, in general, to protect 

investors and the public interest. 

Additionally, the Exchange believes the 

proposed rule change is consistent with 

the Section 6(b)(5) 15 requirement that 

the rules of an exchange not be designed 

to permit unfair discrimination between 

customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. 

The Exchange believes the proposal to 

permit concurrent AIM and C–AIM 

Auctions for Agency Orders for less 

than 50 contracts (or 500 mini-option 

contracts or 5,000 micro-option 

contracts) in the same series or complex 

strategy, respectively, would remove 

impediments to and perfect the 

mechanisms of a free and open market 

and a national market system because it 

would extend concurrent auction 

functionality to smaller-sized Agency 

Orders. The Exchange also believes this 

proposed change is non-controversial 

because it does not raise any issues that 

differ from those previously considered 

when the Exchange and other options 

exchanges adopted this functionality for 

larger-sized agency orders submitted to 

price improvement auctions, or when 

another options exchange adopted this 

functionality (pursuant to an 

immediately effective, noncontroversial 

rule filing) for smaller-sized simple 

agency orders submitted into a price 

improvement auction.16 The Exchange 

believes the proposal will benefit 

investors because it would afford 

smaller-sized Agency Orders increased 

opportunity to solicit price-improving 

auction interest. The Exchange further 

believes that this proposed rule change 

would provide additional benefits to 

customers, as smaller-sized Agency 

Orders tend to represent retail interest, 

and could improve the customer 

experience on the Exchange by 

increasing trading opportunities in AIM 

and C–AIM Auctions. Notwithstanding 

the proposal to allow concurrent AIM 

auctions for smaller-sized Agency 

Orders, the Exchange would continue to 

protect customer interest on the simple 

Book by requiring price improvement 

over the BBO to initiate an Auction for 

smaller-sized Agency Orders and 

rejecting such orders in increment wide 

markets when price improvement is not 

possible. Additionally, the Exchange 

will continue to protect Priority 

Customers on the Simple Book by 

requiring price improvement of at least 

one minimum increment better than the 

SBBO if the applicable side of the BBO 

on any component of the complex 

Agency Order complex strategy 

represents a Priority Customer on the 

Simple Book.17

Further, the Exchange believes the 

proposed new functionality to allow 

concurrent AIM and C–AIM auctions for 

Agency Orders of any size is consistent 

with the Act, as the proposed rule 

changes will prevent the rejection of 

these smaller Agency Orders that occurs 

when such smaller Agency Orders are 

submitted while an AIM or C–AIM 

Auction is in progress, which the 

Exchange believes will increase 

execution opportunities for these 

smaller Agency orders to the benefit of 

investors. For example, in July 2023, the 

new functionality would have provided 

investors with additional price 

improvement and execution 

opportunities via approximately 6,000 

additional AIM or C–AIM Auctions that 

were otherwise rejected due to current 

concurrency limitations. 

The Exchange also believes this 

proposed new functionality to allow 

concurrent AIM and C–AIM auctions for 

Agency Orders of any size should 

promote and foster competition and 

provide more options contracts with the 

opportunity for price improvement, 

which should benefit all market 

participants. In addition, this proposed 

change may lead to an increase in 

Exchange volume and should allow the 

Exchange to better compete against 

other markets that permit overlapping 

price improvement auctions, while 

continuing to ensure that displayed 

customer interest on the simple Book is 

protected. The proposed enhancement 

to allow concurrent auctions for Agency 

Orders of any size would be a 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 188 / Friday, September 29, 2023 / Notices 67403 

18See supra note 8. 

19See supra note 9. 

20 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 

21 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. 

competitive change and may make the 

Exchange a more attractive venue for 

auction-related order flow. As noted 

above, the Exchange believes that its 

trading platform has sufficient capacity 

to process a large volume of concurrent 

Auctions for Agency Orders of any size, 

including for Agency Orders of fewer 

than 50 contracts (or 500 mini-option 

contracts or 5,000 micro-option 

contracts). 

Further, the Exchange believes its 

proposal to amend its AIM Rules to 

require the stop price be at least one 

minimum increment better than the 

then-current NBBO if the NBBO width 

equals the minimum increment for the 

class rather than $0.01 would remove 

impediments to and perfect the 

mechanisms of a free and open market 

and a national market system. As stated 

above, the purpose of this provision is 

to require this price improvement if the 

width of the NBBO is as narrow as 

possible. However, if the minimum 

increment for a class is, for example, 

$0.05, it would not be possible to price 

improve penny-wide market in the 

permissible minimum increment of 

$0.05. The Exchange believes the 

proposal, which is consistent with the 

original intention of current AIM stop 

price rules (which permit the Exchange 

to determine different AIM minimum 

increments for classes), will ensure that 

smaller-sized orders receive this price 

improvement when the NBBO is as 

narrow as possible, to the benefit of the 

marketplace and investors. 

Finally, the Exchange believes the 

proposed rule change related to the 

processing of AIM and C–AIM Auctions 

in the event of early termination will 

promote just and equitable principles of 

trade, in accordance with the Act. The 

Exchange believes processing 

concurrent AIM and C–AIM Auctions 

that end in early termination in time 

priority is a fair and equitable process, 

and consistent with the priority 

applicable to concurrent AIM Auctions 

and concurrent C–AIM Auctions when 

they are terminated early. 

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 that is not 

necessary or appropriate in furtherance 

of the purposes of the Act. The 

Exchange does not believe the proposed 

rule change will impose any burden on 

intramarket competition that is not 

necessary or appropriate in furtherance 

of the purposes of the Act, because it 

will apply uniformly to TPHs. The 

proposed rule change will result in 

smaller orders receiving the same 

opportunities for execution and price 

improvement through AIM and C–AIM 

that are already afforded to larger 

orders, which are not subject to the 

concurrency restriction. As noted above, 

the proposed rule change to require the 

stop price in AIM Auctions be at least 

one minimum increment better than the 

then-current NBBO if the NBBO width 

equals the minimum increment for the 

class rather than $0.01 will ensure that 

smaller-sized orders receive this price 

improvement when the NBBO is as 

narrow as possible, which the Exchange 

believes will result in orders in all 

classes receiving the same price 

improvement opportunities through 

AIM and C–AIM in a manner consistent 

with the applicable minimum 

increment. Further, the Exchange does 

not believe the proposed rule change 

related to the processing of AIM and C– 

AIM Auctions in the event of early 

termination will impose any burden on 

intramarket competition that is not 

necessary or appropriate in furtherance 

of the purposes of the Act, as it will 

apply in the same manner to all Agency 

Orders. 

Additionally, the Exchange notes that 

participation in the AIM and C–AIM 

Auctions is completely voluntary. The 

Exchange believes all market 

participants, particular those that 

submit smaller orders, may benefit from 

any additional liquidity, execution 

opportunities, and price improvement 

in the AIM and C–AIM Auctions that 

may result from the proposed rule 

change. 

The Exchange does not believe the 

proposed rule change will impose any 

burden on intermarket competition that 

is not necessary or appropriate in 

furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 

The Exchange notes that it operates in 

a highly competitive market in which 

market participants can readily direct 

order flow to competing venues who 

offer similar functionality. The 

Exchange believes this proposed rule 

change would promote fair competition 

among the options exchanges and 

establish more uniform functionality 

across the various price improvement 

auctions offered by other options 

exchanges. The proposed functionality 

may lead to an increase in Exchange 

volume and should allow the Exchange 

to better compete against other options 

markets that already offer similar price 

improvement mechanisms and for this 

reason the proposal does not create an 

undue burden on intermarket 

competition. By contrast, not having the 

proposed functionality places the 

Exchange at a competitive disadvantage 

vis-a`-vis other exchanges that offer 

similar price improvement mechanisms. 

As noted above, another options 

exchange adopted this functionality 

(pursuant to an immediately effective, 

noncontroversial rule filing) to allow for 

concurrent price improvement auctions 

for smaller-sized simple agency 

orders,18 and other options exchanges 

(as well as the Exchange) permit simple 

price improvement auctions to occur 

simultaneously with complex price 

improvement auctions for complex 

strategies involving the same series, 

with no size restrictions.19

C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Comments on the 

Proposed Rule Change Received From 

Members, Participants, or Others 

The Exchange neither solicited nor 

received comments on the proposed 

rule change. 

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 from the date on 

which it was filed, or such shorter time 

as the Commission may designate, it has 

become effective pursuant to Section 

19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 20 and Rule 19b– 

4(f)(6) 21 thereunder. 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 will institute proceedings 

to determine whether the proposed rule 

change 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: 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
67404 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 188 / Friday, September 29, 2023 / Notices 

22 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

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– 

CBOE–2023–053 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–CBOE–2023–053. This file 

number should be included on the 

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–CBOE–2023–053 and should be 

submitted on or before October 20, 

2023. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.22

Sherry R. Haywood, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2023–21347 Filed 9–28–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[SEC File No. 270–824; OMB Control No. 

3235–0500] 

Submission for OMB Review; 

Comment Request; Extension: Rule 

608 

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 

(‘‘PRA’’) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the 

Securities and Exchange Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’) has submitted to the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(‘‘OMB’’) a request for approval of 

extension of the previously approved 

collection of information provided for in 

Rule 608 (17 CFR 242.608) under the 

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 

U.S.C. 78a et seq.). 

Rule 608 specifies procedures for 

filing or amending national market 

system plans (‘‘NMS Plans’’). Selfregulatory organizations (‘‘SROs’’) filing 

a new NMS Plan must submit the text 

of the NMS Plan to the Commission, 

along with a statement of purpose, and, 

if applicable, specified supporting 

materials that may include: (1) a copy of 

all governing or constituent documents, 

(2) a description of the manner in which 

the NMS Plan, and any facility or 

procedure contemplated by the NMS 

Plan, will be implemented, (3) a listing 

of all significant phases of development 

and implementation contemplated by 

the NMS Plan, including a projected 

completion date for each phase, (4) an 

analysis of the competitive impact of 

implementing the NMS Plan, (5) a 

description of any written agreements or 

understandings between or among plan 

participants or sponsors relating to 

interpretations of the NMS Plan or 

conditions for becoming a plan 

participant or sponsor, and (6) a 

description of the manner in which any 

facility contemplated by the NMS Plan 

shall be operated. Participants or 

sponsors to the NMS Plan must ensure 

that a current and complete version of 

the NMS Plan is posted on a designated 

website or a plan website after being 

notified by the Commission that the 

NMS Plan is effective. Each plan 

participant or sponsor must also provide 

a link on its own website to the current 

website to the current version of the 

NMS Plan. 

The Commission estimates that the 

creation and submission of a new NMS 

Plan and any related materials would 

result in an average aggregate burden of 

approximately 850 hours per year (25 

SROs × 34 hours = 850 hours). The 

Commission further estimates an 

average aggregate burden of 

approximately 125 hours per year (25 

SROs × 5 hours = 125 hours), for each 

of the SROs to keep a current and 

complete version of the NMS Plan 

posted on a designated website or a plan 

website, and to provide a link to the 

current version of the NMS Plan on its 

own website. In addition, the 

Commission estimates that the creation 

of a new NMS Plan and any related 

materials would result in an average 

aggregate cost of approximately 

$150,000 per year (25 SROs × $6,000 = 

$150,000). 

SROs proposing to amend an existing 

NMS Plan must submit the text of the 

amendment to the Commission, along 

with a statement of purpose, and, if 

applicable, the supporting materials 

described above, as well as a statement 

that the amendment has been approved 

by the plan participants or sponsors in 

accordance with the terms of the NMS 

Plan. Participants or sponsors to the 

NMS Plan must ensure that any 

proposed amendments are posted to a 

designated website or a plan website 

after filing the amendments with the 

Commission and that those websites are 

updated to reflect the current status of 

the amendment and the NMS Plan. Each 

plan participant or sponsor must also 

provide a link on its own website to the 

current version of the NMS Plan. The 

Commission estimates that the creation 

and submission of NMS Plan 

amendments and any related materials 

would result in an average aggregate 

burden of approximately 11,050 hours 

per year (25 SROs × 442 hours = 11,050 

hours). The Commission further 

estimates an average aggregate burden of 

approximately 124 hours per year (25 

SROs × 4.94 hours = 123.5 hours 

rounded up to 124) for SROs to post any 

pending NMS Plan amendments to a 

designated website or a plan website 

and to update such websites to reflect 

the current status of the amendment and 

the NMS Plan. In addition, the 

Commission estimates that the creation 

of an NMS Plan amendment and any 

related materials would result in an 

average aggregate cost of approximately 

$325,000 per year (25 SROs × $13,000 

= $325,000). 

Finally, to the extent that a plan 

processor is required for any facility 

contemplated by a NMS Plan, the plan 

participants or sponsors must file with 

the Commission a statement identifying 

the plan processor selected, describing 

the material terms under which the plan 

processor is to serve, and indicating the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1