FirstAlerts

SAFEWAY #2932 in Seattle Recorded 63 Violation Points in Health Inspection

A King County public health inspection recorded 63 violation points at SAFEWAY #2932 in Seattle on August 19, 2026.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 20, 2026, 10:53 a.m. ET
SAFEWAY #2932, located at in , recorded 63 violation points during a public health inspection on August 19, 2026, where an inspection with no violations scores zero. The public health inspection record shows no later inspection of this establishment, though it may have been re-inspected since without the record being updated. According to the public health inspection record, the inspection resulted in an rating with an inspection score of and a risk category of 3. The inspector recorded the following observations during the inspection: 1900 - No room temperature storage; proper use of time as a control, procedures available; 1710 - Proper hot holding temperatures; less than 130 degrees Fahrenheit (F) (54 degrees Celsius (C)); 3700 - In-use utensils properly stored; and 2110 - Proper cold holding temperatures; greater than 45 degrees Fahrenheit (F) (7 degrees Celsius (C)).

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 120 Aug 2026, 14:53current

    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.