Defendant-Appellant Edward David Rosa appeals his sentence following his guilty plea conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm. He argues that the district court erred in increasing his base offense level by two levels pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(3)(B) and assigning a base offense level of 20 pursuant to § 2Kl.l(a)(4)(B) because the pipe bomb found at his residence did not constitute a destructive device.

We have determined that a pipe bomb is a destructive device under § 5845(f). See United States v. Hunn, 344 Fed.Appx. 920, 921 (5th Cir. 2009) (finding that homemade pipe bomb was a destructive device under § 5845(f)); United States v. Charles, 883 F.2d 355, 357 (5th Cir. 1989) (concluding that three pipe bombs were destructive devices under § 5845(f)). Thus, the district court did not clearly err in enhancing Rosa’s sentence pursuant to § 2K2.1(b)(3)(B) or in assigning a base offense level of 20 pursuant to § 2K2.1(a)(4)(B). See United States v. Cisneros-Gutierrez, 517 F.3d 751, 764 (5th Cir. 2008). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.