table in § 2F1.1_” Here the enhancement properly reflected the total market value of the mussels involved — $55,-784.76. Second, Borden challenges the district court’s decision to impose a two-level enhancement for Borden’s role as “an organizer, leader, manager, or supervisor in [the] criminal activity” under § 3B 1.1(c) of the guidelines. This argument is meritless. The record shows that Borden organized many Ohio River mussel dives by making cash advances to Hicks, informing several divers about the location of the Ohio River mussel beds, and warning divers of the DNR “crackdown” on the Ohio River. The trial court’s factual finding that Borden assumed a leadership role in the musseling activity was not clearly erroneous, see United States v. Smith, 914 F.2d 565, 569 (4th Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>), and we affirm Borden’s sentence. VI. We find
holding that pretext is subject to the clearly erroneous standard holding that the clearly erroneous standard of review applies unless judgment is entered on the basis of documentary evidence alone holding that the finding of intent to discriminate is a factual determination subject to the clearly erroneous standard of review holding that the clearly erroneous standard of review applies to  3bllc determinations holding that courts of appeals should review the facts necessary to determine whether an exemption to the flsa applies in a particular under the clearly erroneous standard