No. Overt acts are not themselves criminal charges; they're evidentiary requirements for a conspiracy charge. Individual overt acts don't even have to be backed by statutes; an "overt act" in a conspiracy might not itself be a criminal violation at all. I think you're trying to work back from some faulty first principles here.

What you should do here is compare the plea stipulation to the superseding indictment, and note that the "overt acts" of the conspiracy charge refer back to the "general allegations" section. Or: you could go track down any other conspiracy indictment (Ulbricht's is a fun one) and see examples of "overt acts" listed explicitly.