to trigger the mandatory minimum imprisonment terms. U.S.S.G.App. C, Amend. 750, Reason for Amendment. To account for the statutory changes in crack cocaine sentencing, the Sentencing Commission implemented Amendment 750 to revise the drug quantity table to lower the base offense levels for crack cocaine. See U.S.S.G.App. C, Amend. 750, Reason for Amendment; U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(c)(7). Under § 3582, dis atutory mandatory minimum, due to the government filing a substantial assistance motion, the district court’s downward departure does not constitute a waiver of the applicability of the mandatory minimum; thus, the sentence remains based upon the mandatory minimum for purposes of § 3582(c)(2). Williams, 549 F.3d at 1340-41; United States v. Mills, 613 F.3d 1070, 1077-78 (11th Cir.2010) (<HOLDING>). In this case, regardless of which Guideline
holding that a sentence below a statutory minimum based on the filing of a substantial assistance motion did not eliminate the otherwise applicable mandatory minimum for purposes of sentence modification under  3582c2 holding that amendment 706 did not have the effect of lowering the applicable guideline range where the defendants received statutory mandatory minimum sentences and thus the defendants were not eligible for relief under  3582 holding that even if the minimum mandatory exceeds the statutory maximum the court must impose the minimum mandatory holding that where the statutory mandatory minimum sentence is higher than the upper end of the guideline range the court departs from the statutory level ie the lowest offense level that could support the statutory minimum holding that the operative provision in determining the defendants applicable sentencing range is the statutory minimum  not the crack cocaine guideline and that the defendants were still subject to the mandatory minimum upon which their substantial assistance departures  and thus them ultimate sentences  were based