Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
a DD Form 214 is a "source document” that “retires ... or transitions a person from the military.” Aplt.App. at 141. He also clarified that a DD Form 214 separates a person from the Army "[rjegardless of whether the Army did all the follow-up paperwork and computer entries and so forth properly[J” Id. 3 . There is no uniformly accepted definition of the phrase "acting as such,” and courts disagree with respect to the amount of independence required to separate an overt act from the original act of impersonation. Compare United States v. Rosser, 528 F.2d 652, 657 (D.C.Cir.1976) ("the act that completes a violation of Section 912(1) must be something more than merely an act in keeping with the falsely assumed character”) with United States v. Gayle, 967 F.2d 483, 488 (11th Cir. 1992) . This case does not require us to weigh in on
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that an indictment under  912 need not allege additional acts beyond the general act of impersonation
B. holding when a statute defines manner or means of committing an offense indictment need not allege matters beyond the language of the statute
C. holding that an indictment under  922g1 was not required to allege a substantial effect on interstate commerce an indictment which tracked the statutory language was sufficient
D. holding that an indictment charging one offense during the commission of another crime need not allege the elements of the latter offense
E. holding that a found in indictment need not allege all of the elements of entry
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.