Turns out yes to the extensive planning enhancement, as well as an aggravated role enhancement. But no to the harm/substantial interference/special skills enhancements. Details in uncle/aunt comment (is that a term?) now that I've found the plea agreement.
Thanks! I found it in the California Central District PACER instance by searching for his full name (both the court and name given in the DoJ press release) - I suspect the national index syncs only so often with the individual PACER instances and it just hasn't got this case yet.
