With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". the imprisonment authorized absent the enhancement. See USSG § 2J1.7, comment, (n. 2). Guideline commentary, like a government agency’s interpretation of its own rules, is to be given controlling weight unless it violates the Constitution or a federal statute, is plainly erroneous, or is inconsistent with the guideline provision that it explains. See Stinson v. United States, — U.S. —, —, 113 S.Ct. 1913, 1919, 123 L.Ed.2d 598 (1993). We agree with Stevens that the example provided by the commentary to § 2J1.7 is inconsistent with that guideline. As previously discussed, the purpose of § 2J1.7 is to effectuate § 3147 by providing for additional punishment to that required by the guidelines for the offense of conviction. See United States v. Wilson, 966 F.2d 243, 248-49 (7th Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>); see also Stevens I, 985 F.2d at 1189 (citing

A: holding that prison term attributable to offense of conviction must fall within permissible range absent  2j17 enhancement
B: holding that the application of the enhancement for using a firearm in connection with another felony offense is proper only if there is a clear connection between the firearm that was used in the other offense and the one that was used in the offense of conviction
C: holding that involuntary commitment to a mental hospital is not within the range of conditions of confinement to which a prison sentence subjects an individual
D: holding an uncounseled misdemeanor conviction is valid because no prison term was imposed and the conviction may be used to enhance a sentence for a subsequent offense
A.