of limitations under the False Claims Act. The statute of limitations does not begin to run until the material facts are known by an official within the Department of Justice with the authority to act in the circumstances.” S.Rep. No. 345, 99th Cong., 2d Sess. 30 (1986), reprinted, in U.S.Code Cong. & Admin. News 5266, 6295. This suggests that the government’s construction is the right one. However, as one district court has suggested, the Senate Report may have concerned an earlier version of the proposed legislation that included different wording. See United States ex rel. Condie v. Board of Regents of the University of California, No. C89-3550, 1993 WL 740195, at *1 (N.D.Cal. Sept. 7, 1993). In view of this ambiguity, the legislative history is F.Supp. 272, 274 (M.D.Tenn.1990) (<HOLDING>). But see United States v. Kensington Hospital,
holding that the official charged with responsibility to act must be an official within the doj with the authority to act in the circumstances holding without discussion that the official of the united states charged with responsibility could only have been the appropriate official of the civil division of the department of justice which alone has the authority to initiate litigation under the act holding that the united states department of justice waived its immunity from money damages under subsection a holding that where a public official takes discretionary action that the official knows will directly benefit a financial interest that the official has concealed in violation of a state criminal law that official has deprived the public of his honest services under  1346 holding that the color of law element may be satisfied by the fact that an official gains access to the victim in the course of official duty