LAFAYETTE, LA —
OSHA Inspection: BARNEY'S, INC.
Complaint inspection · Health discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened a complaint health inspection of BARNEY'S, INC. in 218 FOUR PARK RD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70507 (NAICS 423910). OSHA activity number 341174381.
What this inspection record means
OSHA opens inspections for many reasons — routine scheduling under a national or local emphasis program, an employee complaint or referral, or a follow-up after a reported injury. Opening or conducting an inspection is not itself an allegation or a finding that this employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.
Watch Barney'S, INC. — free
Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Barney'S, INC. is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Where did this inspection happen?
- Establishment
- BARNEY'S, INC.
- Site address
- 218 FOUR PARK RD
- City
- LAFAYETTE
- State
- LA
- ZIP
- 70507
- Mailing
- 218 FOUR PARK RD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70507
What kind of inspection was it?
- Inspection type
- Complaint (B)
- Scope
- Partial (B)
- Discipline
- Health
- Advance notice
- No
- Union status
- B
When did the case open and close?
- Opened
- Closing conference
- Case closed
- Last modified
- Data loaded
Establishment context
- NAICS code
- 423910
- Employees
- 31
- Ownership type
- A
Citations
16 citations on file for this inspection.
1910.134 E01
- Issued
- Jun 6, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 6, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $4,900 · Current $4,410 Reduced
1591
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.134(e)(1): The employer did not provide a medical evaluation to determine the employee's ability to use a respirator, before the employee was fit tested or required to use the respirator in the workplace: On or about January 13, 2016 the employer did not ensure that employees required to wear respirators to protect against the hazard of airborne lead were provided a medical evaluation to determine the employee's ability to use a respirator before the employees used respirators in the facility.
Recent events (3)
- — F (S) $4410
- — C (S) $4900
- — Z (S) $4900
1910.134 F01
- Issued
- Jun 6, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 6, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $4,900 · Current $0 Reduced
1591
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.134(f)(1): The employer did not ensure that employee(s) required to use a tight-fitting facepiece respirator passed the appropriate qualitative fit test (QLFT) or quantitative fit test (QNFT): On or about January 13, 2016 the employer did not ensure that employees required to use tight-fitting facepiece respirators to protect against the hazard of airborne lead in the workplace passed a fit test to determine appropriate fit and seal of the respirators.
Recent events (3)
- — F (S) $0
- — C (S) $4900
- — Z (S) $4900
1910.134 G01 I A
- Issued
- Jun 6, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 6, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $4,900 · Current $0 Reduced
1591
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.134(g)(1)(i)(A): Respirators with tight-fitting facepieces were worn by employees who had facial hair that came between the sealing surface of the facepiece and the face or that interfered with valve function: On or about January 13, 2016 the employer did not ensure that employees required to wear tight fitting face piece respirators in the course of their duty to protect against airborne lead were clean shaven to ensure adequate face to face piece seal and prevent valve malfunction.
Recent events (3)
- — F (S) $0
- — C (S) $4900
- — Z (S) $4900
1910.134 K01
- Issued
- Jun 6, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 6, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $4,900 · Current $0 Reduced
1591
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.134(k)(1): The employer did not provide effective training to employees who were required to use respirators: On or about January 13, 2016 the employer did not ensure that employees who were required to use respirators in the course of their job duties to protect against the hazards of airborne lead were effectively trained upon hire initially and thereafter annually.
Recent events (3)
- — F (S) $0
- — C (S) $4900
- — Z (S) $4900
1910.1025 C01
- Issued
- Jun 6, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 6, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $4,900 · Current $0 Reduced
1591
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.1025(c)(1): Employee(s) were exposed to lead at concentrations greater than fifty micrograms per cubic meter of air averaged over an eight-hour period: On or about January 13, 2016 the employer allowed employees conducting daily cleaning operations in the shooting range to be exposed in excess of the airborne concentration allowable of lead of 50 ug/m3 or 0.050 mg/m3 for an 8 hour time weighted average. This violation occurred when: a) An employee performing daily cleaning operations was exposed to a time weighted average of 0.0616 mg/m3. b) An employee performing daily cleaning operations was exposed to a time weighted average of 0.0550 mg/m3.
Recent events (3)
- — F (S) $0
- — C (S) $4900
- — Z (S) $4900
1910.1025 D02
- Issued
- Jun 6, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 6, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $4,900 · Current $4,410 Reduced
1591
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.1025(d)(2): An initial determination was not made to determine if any employee may be exposed to lead at or above the action level: On or about January 13, 2016 and at times prior to the employer allowed employees conducting daily cleaning operations in the shooting range to be exposed in excess of the airborne concentration allowable of lead of 50 ug/m3 or 0.050 mg/m3 for an 8 hour time weighted average. No initial determination of the exposure was documented.
Recent events (3)
- — F (S) $4410
- — C (S) $4900
- — Z (S) $4900
1910.1025 E01 I
- Issued
- Jun 6, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 6, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $4,900 · Current $0 Reduced
1591
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.1025(e)(1)(i): For any employees exposed to lead above the permissible exposure limit for more than 30 days per year where engineering and work practice controls (including administrative controls) were feasible but did not reduce the employees' exposure to or below the permissible exposure limit the employer did not use engineering and/or work practice controls to reduce esposures to the lowest feasible level: On or about January 13, 2016 the employer allowed employees conducting daily cleaning operations in the shooting range to be exposed in excess of the airborne concentration allowable of lead of 50 ug/m3 or 0.050 mg/m3 for an 8 hour time weighted average. Engineering controls and work practice controls within the facility were not sufficient to reduce employee exposures below the OSHA PEL. This violation occurred when: a) An employee performing daily cleaning operations was exposed to a time weighted average of 0.0616 mg/m3. b) An employee performing daily cleaning operations was exposed to a time weighted average of 0.0550 mg/m3.
Recent events (3)
- — F (S) $0
- — C (S) $4900
- — Z (S) $4900
1910.1025 G02 IV
- Issued
- Jun 6, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 6, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $4,900 · Current $0 Reduced
1591
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.1025(g)(2)(iv): Protective clothing against lead was not removed at the completion of the work shift in change rooms provided for that purpose as prescribed in 29 CFR 1910.1025(i)(2): On or about January 13, 2016 the employer allowed employees conducting daily cleaning operations in the shooting range to remove protective clothing in an area not prescribed as an appropriate change room per 29 CFR 1910.1025(I)(2), creating additional exposures to airborne lead dust and dermal exposures to lead dust through contact with contaminated personal protective equipment and an unclean changing environment.
Recent events (3)
- — F (S) $0
- — C (S) $4900
- — Z (S) $4900
1910.1025 H01
- Issued
- Jun 6, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 6, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $4,900 · Current $4,410 Reduced
1591
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.1025(h)(1): All surfaces were not maintained as free as practicable of accumulations of lead: On or about January 13, 2016 the employer did not ensure that all surfaces within the facility were maintained as free as practicable of accumulations of lead from airborne lead dust that settled as a result of shooting range activities. Areas of particular note were the shooting range itself and the warehouse.
Recent events (3)
- — F (S) $4410
- — C (S) $4900
- — Z (S) $4900
1910.1025 H02 II
- Issued
- Jun 6, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 6, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $4,900 · Current $0 Reduced
1591
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.1025(h)(2)(ii): Shoveling, sweeping or brushing methods were used to remove lead accumulations where vacuuming or other equally effective methods were available and feasible: On or about January 13, 2016 the employer did not make available alternative methods to dry sweeping, increasing employee exposures to airborne lead dust above the OSHA PEL during daily clean up operations where vacuuming or other equally effective methods were available and feasible.
Recent events (3)
- — F (S) $0
- — C (S) $4900
- — Z (S) $4900
1910.1025 I02 II
- Issued
- Jun 6, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 6, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $4,900 · Current $0 Reduced
1591
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.1025(i)(2)(ii): Change rooms were not equipped with separate storage facilities for protective work clothing and equipment and for street clothes to prevent cross contamination from lead: On or about January 13, 2016 the employer did not ensure that change rooms provided were equipped with separate storage facilities for protective work clothing and equipment and street clothes to prevent cross contamination from lead, change room provided was within the contaminated work area while storage area was outside the area.
Recent events (3)
- — F (S) $0
- — C (S) $4900
- — Z (S) $4900
1910.1025 I03 II
- Issued
- Jun 6, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 6, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $4,900 · Current $0 Reduced
1591
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.1025(i)(3)(ii): Shower facilities, in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.141(d)(3), were not provided for employee(s) exposed to lead in excess of the permissible exposure limit (PEL), without regard to the use of respirators: On or about January 13, 2016 the employer did not provide shower facilities in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.141(d)(3) for employees exposed to lead in excess of the OSHA PEL without regard to the use of respirators, who perform daily cleaning operations in the shooting range, weekly cleaning of the lead traps and monthly changing of the air filters.
Recent events (3)
- — F (S) $0
- — C (S) $4900
- — Z (S) $4900
1910.1025 J02 I A
- Issued
- Jun 6, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 6, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $4,900 · Current $4,410 Reduced
1591
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.1025(j)(2)(i)(A): The employer did not make available biological monitoring in the form of blood sampling and analysis for lead and zinc protoporphyrin levels at least every 6 months to each affected employee: On or about January 13, 2016 the employer did not ensure that each affected employee were provided biological monitoring in the form of blood sampling and analysis for lead and zinc protoporphyrin levels at least every six months.
Recent events (3)
- — F (S) $4410
- — C (S) $4900
- — Z (S) $4900
1910.1025 L01 I
- Issued
- Jun 6, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 6, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $4,900 · Current $4,410 Reduced
1591
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.1025(l)(1)(i): Employee(s) working in an area where there is potential exposure to airborne lead at any level were not informed of the content of Appendices A and B of 29 CFR 1910.1025: On or about January 13, 2016 the employer did not ensure that each affected employee was provided with a copy of the contents of Appendices A and B of 29 CFR 1910.1025 or their equivalent, providing adequate hazard warning of potential lead exposure and requirements of the employer.
Recent events (3)
- — F (S) $4410
- — C (S) $4900
- — Z (S) $4900
1910.1025 L01 II
- Issued
- Jun 6, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 6, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $4,900 · Current $0 Reduced
1591
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.1025(l)(1)(ii): The employer did not train each employee who is subject to exposure to lead at or above the action level, or for whom the possibility of skin or eye irritation exists, in accordance with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.1025:(a)(LOCATION)(IDENTIFY JOB TITLE, SPECIFIC OPERATION(S) AND/OR CONDITIONS)(DESCRIBE HAZARD(S) WHERE NECESSARY) On or about January 13, 2016 the employer did not ensure that employees who are subject to lead at or above the action level while performing daily, weekly and monthly cleaning duties associated with the operations of the firing range were trained in accordance with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.1025.
Recent events (3)
- — F (S) $0
- — C (S) $4900
- — Z (S) $4900
1910.1200 E01
- Issued
- Jun 6, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 6, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $4,900 · Current $0 Reduced
1591
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1): The employer did not develop, implement, and/or maintain at the workplace a written hazard communication program which describes how the criteria specified in 29 CFR 1910.1200(f), (g), and (h) will be met: On or about January 13, 2016 the employer did not develop, implement, or maintain a hazard communication program in reference to the chemicals that employees could be exposed to during the clean up of the firing range, specifically airborne lead dust that is a known mutagen and carries a cancer warning.
Recent events (3)
- — F (S) $0
- — C (S) $4900
- — Z (S) $4900
More inspections at Barney'S, INC.
View Barney'S, INC.'s full OSHA safety record →
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 423910)
Mar 25, 2026
Hasa INC. · POMONA, CA
Mar 19, 2026
Sportika Export INC. · BERLIN, CT
Mar 17, 2026
Everlast Climbing Industries · MISSOULA, MT
Feb 25, 2026
WA317990011 - LFS INC · BELLINGHAM, WA
Jan 22, 2026
WA317989497 - LFS INC · BELLINGHAM, WA
More inspections in LA
Jul 15, 2026
SE Tylose USA, INC. · PLAQUEMINE, LA
Jul 15, 2026
Gulley'S Welding & Steel Erectors, INC. · LAFAYETTE, LA
Jul 15, 2026
Acorrea Company, LLC · LAFAYETTE, LA
Jul 14, 2026
Gulf Coast Woodwork, L.L.C. · LAFAYETTE, LA
Jul 14, 2026
Oxychem · BELLE ROSE, LA
Source
This record is reproduced from the U.S. Department of Labor Open Data API (OSHA inspection dataset). The original IMIS detail view is available at OSHA's Establishment Search for activity number 341174381.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.