How have the courts interpreted the provisions of section 1B1.1(a)(2)-(4) of the US Civil Aviation Guidelines?

This argument, however, proves too much. Subsections 1B1.1(a)(2)-(4) instruct courts to make various determinations under Chapters Two and Three of the guidelines. Because these chapters contain numerous departures, one could apply Brantley's and Stith's argument to many, if not most, of the departures created by the guidelines. We have previously rejected this argument precisely because of its staggering breadth, finding that "[n]o one could argue that . . . the various . . . departures sprinkled throughout Chapters Two and Three amount to departures to, rather than from, the applicable range, even though [ 1B1.1(a)] require[s] judges to apply Chapters Two and Three before determining the applicable range." United States v. Rivera, 662 F.3d 166, 181 n.14 (2d Cir. 2011).