Furthermore, an “effluent limitation” is defined as “any restriction established by a State or the [EPA] Administrator on quantities, rates, and concentrations of chemical, physical, biological, and other constituents which are discharged from point sources.” 33 U.S.C. § 1362(11) (emphasis supplied). Given the forgoing, it is clear the Clean Water Act expressly contemplates stricter state effluent and other limitations deemed necessary by the state to restore the integrity of the waters within the state, allows states to incorporate those limitations into a state-issued permit, and .authorizes a citizen suit to enforce those limitations. See Northwest Environmental Advocates v. Portland, 56 F.3d 979, 985-90 (9th Cir.1995), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 2550, 135 L.Ed.2d 1069 (1996) (<HOLDING>); Culbertson v. Coats American, Inc., 913
holding citizen suit jurisdiction exists to enforce permit conditions based on stateestablished standards holding workers compensation insurer deemed by section 1332c to be citizen of state of which insured is citizen in suit brought by insureds injured employee holding that the court had jurisdiction to hear the suit under the citizen suit provision of the caa holding that a limited partnership is not itself a citizen and that courts must instead look to the citizenship of its members to determine if diversity jurisdiction exists holding that a federal court must enforce a state court judgment under the full faith and credit statute where diversity jurisdiction exists