the additiona Freeman planned on using to rob the undercover agent was one of the firearms that was stolen from the Arcade. We conclude that because § 2K2.1(b)(6) was not shown to be applicable, Freeman’s plan to rob the undercover agent qualifies as a circumstance under § 5K2.0(a)(2)(B) that was not identified by the underlying Guidelines provision. And even if we assume for the sake of argument that § 2K2.1(b)(6) could in fact cover Freeman’s plan to rob the undercover agent, the district court’s alleged error in applying § 5K2.0(a)(2)(B) instead of § 2K2.1(b)(6) would be harmless if “we are certain that the error did not affect the district court’s selection of the sentence imposed.” United States v. Jeross, 521 F.3d 562, 569, 573-76 (6th Cir.2008) (internal quotation marks omitted) (<HOLDING>). Nor would the application of § 2K2.1(b)(6) in
holding that where a defendants guideline range is 121 to 151 months and his statutory minimum sentence is 240 months and the government moves for a downward departure pursuant to both  3553e and  5k11 the starting point for the departure is 240 months and the court is not limited to the low end of the guideline range in determining the extent of the departure holding statutory error harmless where district court imposed the highest available sentence under guidelines range and considered sentencing to the statutory maximum holding statutory booker error was not harmless where district court imposed sentence in middle of guidelines range and there were no statements in the record reflecting that the court would have imposed the same or greater sentence under advisory guidelines holding that the district courts use of an incorrect method for calculating the amount of drugs at issue was harmless because the end result under either method would have resulted in the court departfingj downward from the guidelines range and rendering a sentence within the statutory maximum of 240 months imprisonment and njothing in the record moreover suggests that the district court would have imposed a sentence of less than 240 months holding that the district courts error in calculating the amount of drugs at issue was harmless because the error had no impact on the defendants sentence