FirstAlerts

Pasifika Northwest Grill and Bar in Tukwila Logged 48 Violation Points

An August 12, 2026, King County health inspection cited four violations at the Tukwila establishment.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 19, 2026, 11:57 a.m. ET
According to public health inspection data from August 12, 2026, , located at in , Washington, registered 48 violation points, where an inspection with no violations scores zero. The inspection listed a risk category of 3 and an result with a score of . The situation remains developing. Official public files show no later inspection of this establishment. It may have been re-inspected since without the public system being updated. Inspectors documented four specific observations during the visit: 1600 - Proper cooling procedure; 4300 - Nonfood-contact surfaces maintained and clean; 2120 - Proper cold holding temperatures; between 42 to 45 degrees Fahrenheit (F) (6 to 7 degrees Celsius (C)); and 0600 - Adequate handwashing facilities.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 119 Aug 2026, 15:57current

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.