Lewis Franklin, a federal prisoner convicted of a crack cocaine offense, appeals the denial of his motion for a sentence reduction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) and Amendment 706 to the Sentencing Guidelines. * The district court denied the section 3582(c)(2) motion because Franklin had been sentenced as a *403 career offender. No reversible error has been shown; we affirm.

On appeal, Franklin argues that the district court erred in concluding that Amendment 706 did not apply to him. He concedes that his argument is foreclosed by our prior precedent and acknowledges that he raises it only to preserve it for later review. We review de novo the district court’s legal conclusions about the scope of its authority under the Sentencing Guidelines in a section 3582(c)(2) proceeding. United States v. James, 548 F.3d 983, 984 (11th Cir. 2008).

Here, the district court committed no error in denying Franklin’s section 3582(c)(2) motion. Because Franklin was sentenced based on the career-offender offense level instead of the offense level determined by drug quantity, he was ineligible for a sentence reduction under Amendment 706. United States v. Moore, 541 F.3d 1323, 1330 (11th Cir. 2008), cert. denied, McFadden v. United States, — U.S. -, 129 S.Ct. 965, 173 L.Ed.2d 156 (2009), and cert. denied, — U.S. -, 129 S.Ct. 1601, 173 L.Ed.2d 689 (2009) (concluding that the district court had no authority to reduce the sentence of a defendant who was sentenced as a career offender under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1).

AFFIRMED.