Alexander Ahlf, convicted of theft in 1990, appeals the sentence imposed by the district court upon revocation of his three-year term of supervised release. Although Ahlf admitted at sentencing that he violated the conditions of his supervision by using cocaine, a Grade C violation with a guideline range of 3 to 9 months,1 U.S.S.G. Sec. 7B1.4(a), the district court found that Ahlf possessed cocaine and sentenced him to the statutory mandatory minimum term of one year imprisonment, one-third of the term of supervised release, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 3583(g). We affirm.

The district court based its finding of possession upon five urine specimens which tested positive for cocaine and Ahlf's admission, given in writing shortly after he provided two positive urine samples and in a statement to the court at the revocation hearing, that he knowingly used cocaine on two separate occasions. Ahlf argues that drug use should not be equated with possession for purposes of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 3583(g). He contends that use is less culpable than possession, primarily because an individual who possesses a controlled substance has control over it and has the power to distribute the drug to others. Section 3583(g), however, makes no distinction between simple possession and possession with the intent to distribute.2

The district court established that Ahlf knowingly snorted cocaine. We agree therefore that the use of cocaine required possession, even if only momentarily. United States v. Young, No. 93-3603, slip op. at 3-5 (7th Cir. Dec. 7, 1994) ("in the revocation of supervision context, 'use' is subsumed within 'possession' where the defendant knowingly and voluntarily consumes the controlled substance"). We hold that the district court's finding of possession was not clearly erroneous. 18 U.S.C. 3742(e). The sentence is AFFIRMED.