ROGERS, Circuit Judge. Defendant Eduardo Velasquez was convicted of conspiracy to use interstate commerce to commit murder-for-hire, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1958(a). After a remand from our panel, the only substantial remaining issue is whether the district court erred by denying Velasquez a sentencing guideline reduction under U.S.S.G. § 2X1.1(b)(2), which provides for a three-level decrease “unless the defendant or a co-conspirator completed [or was about to complete] all the acts the conspirators believed necessary on their part for the successful completion of the substantive offense[.]” On remand, the district court denied the three-level reduction, based upon its determination that Velasquez completed the underlying offense of using interstate commerce with intent to commit murder-for-hire. Denial of the § 2X1.1(b)(2) reduction was correct, however, for a more fundamental reason. The cross-reference in U.S.S.G. § 2X1.1(c) provides that when the “conspiracy is expressly covered by another offense guideline section, apply that guideline section.” The guideline that covers Velasquez’s case—as we held in our previous opinion—is U.S.S.G. § 2A1.5, which expressly covers conspiracy to commit murder. U.S.S.G. § 2X1.1(b) is accordingly not applicable to Velasquez in the first place.