FLORIDA. A Burger King on US Highway 19 in Palm Harbor drew more high-severity violations than any other location in the chain's Florida network during a 90-day inspection window ending August 11, 2026, with state inspectors documenting seven high-priority citations at the single address, including improperly stored toxic chemicals, failures in parasite destruction procedures, and food contact surfaces that were not properly cleaned or sanitized.
The Worst of the 90 Days
Burger King #4010 at 32375 US Hwy 19 N accumulated eight total violations during the period, seven of them high-severity. Inspectors cited the location for improper hand and arm washing technique, a failure to follow required procedures for specialized food processes, and a missing consumer advisory for raw or undercooked foods. Toxic chemicals were improperly stored or labeled. Time as a public health control was not properly applied.
That location also drew a citation for failing to follow parasite destruction procedures, a violation that appeared at three other Florida Burger King locations during the same period.
Burger King 7257 at 1093 US 301 in Baldwin logged five high-severity violations, including food found in poor condition, mislabeled, or adulterated, alongside the same parasite destruction failure and improperly stored toxic chemicals. Multi-use utensils were not properly cleaned, according to the intermediate citation.
Burger King #28769 at 16130 NW US Hwy 441 in Alachua drew five high-severity citations with no intermediate violations, including a finding that employees were not reporting symptoms of illness and that shell stock identification records were inadequate. Food contact surfaces were not properly cleaned or sanitized, and no consumer advisory was posted for raw or undercooked foods.
Burger King at 4704 Babcock St in Palm Bay was cited for food from an unapproved or unknown source, a finding that appeared at only this one location among the ten flagged sites. Inspectors also documented employees not reporting illness symptoms, improperly stored toxic chemicals, and toxic substances that were improperly identified, stored, or used, two separate chemical-related high-severity citations at the same address.
Burger King #7299 at 16025 S Dixie Hwy in Miami was cited for inadequate shell stock identification records, failure to follow parasite destruction procedures, and improperly cleaned food contact surfaces. Single-use items were documented as being improperly reused.
Burger King #9162 at 1007 NW 21 Ct in Chiefland accumulated the most total violations of any location on the list, eight citations across high and intermediate categories. Inspectors found the person in charge was not present or not performing duties, employees were not reporting illness symptoms, and cooling and cold holding equipment was inadequate. Single-use items were improperly reused, and ventilation was cited as inadequate.
Burger King at 11834 E Colonial Dr in Orlando drew citations for improper hand and arm washing technique, food in poor condition or adulterated, and two separate toxic substance violations. Sanitizing solution or procedures were cited as improper in the intermediate finding.
Burger King #5313 at 3770 Ulmerton Rd in Clearwater logged four high-severity violations with no intermediate citations, including employees not reporting illness symptoms and required procedures for specialized processes not followed.
Burger King at 1164 Malabar Rd SE in Palm Bay, the second Palm Bay location to appear in the 90-day data, was cited for inadequate shell stock identification, improperly stored toxic chemicals, and no allergen awareness demonstrated. Improper waste disposal was among the intermediate findings.
Burger King at 3811 Nova Rd in Port Orange drew eight total violations, including a finding that the person in charge was absent or not performing duties. Inspectors also documented improper sewage or wastewater disposal, an intermediate citation that appeared at no other location in this group.
What These Violations Mean
The most frequently cited high-severity violation across all ten locations was improperly cleaned or sanitized food contact surfaces, appearing at nine of the ten flagged Burger King sites. Surfaces that contact food, including prep boards, utensils, and equipment, can transfer bacteria directly to the next item prepared. A surface that tests clean visually can still carry a bacterial biofilm capable of contaminating every order that follows.
Toxic chemical violations appeared at eight of the ten locations, in some form. At the Palm Bay Babcock Street location, inspectors issued two separate chemical citations, one for improper storage or labeling and one for improper identification, storage, or use. Cleaning agents, sanitizers, and pesticides stored near or above food preparation areas can contaminate food through spills, aerosol drift, or mislabeled containers used by staff who do not recognize the contents.
Parasite destruction failures at the Palm Harbor, Baldwin, and Miami locations carry a specific risk that is easy to underestimate at a fast food chain. When fish or other proteins are not frozen to required temperatures for required durations before serving, parasites including Anisakis in fish and Trichinella in pork can survive into the finished product. At a chain where customers do not expect to order anything requiring parasite controls, the presence of this violation raises questions about what is being served and how it is being handled before it reaches the grill.
The employee illness reporting failures at Alachua, Palm Bay Babcock, Chiefland, Clearwater, and Port Orange represent a direct transmission risk. Norovirus, the most common cause of foodborne illness outbreaks in restaurants, spreads person to person through contaminated hands. A worker who reports symptoms can be removed from food handling. A worker who does not report, or who works in a facility without a clear reporting policy, becomes a potential source for every customer served during that shift.
The Longer Record
Across its 429 Florida locations, Burger King has accumulated 7,176 inspections on record, averaging 4.28 violations per inspection and passing 87.41 percent of inspections statewide. No emergency closures were recorded in the current year. That pass rate means roughly one in eight inspections across the chain's Florida footprint results in a failed outcome.
The statewide inspection volume, more than 7,000 inspections across a single chain, provides a baseline that makes the ten flagged locations more meaningful. A location drawing seven high-severity violations in a single inspection cycle is not a statistical outlier in a small dataset. It is a documented outlier against a very large one.
The Chiefland and Port Orange locations each combined a missing or inactive person in charge with the full cluster of downstream failures: uncleaned food contact surfaces, employee illness reporting gaps, and equipment or ventilation deficiencies. CDC data cited in the inspection records indicates that facilities without active managerial control accumulate critical violations at three times the rate of supervised locations. Both sites demonstrated that pattern in a single inspection cycle.
The Palm Bay Babcock Street location's citation for food from an unapproved or unknown source was the only such finding among the ten locations reviewed. Food from unapproved sources bypasses federal safety inspection entirely, meaning there is no traceability if a customer becomes ill and no documented chain of custody connecting the product to a regulated facility. That citation, combined with two separate toxic substance violations at the same address, made it one of the more consequential single-location findings in the 90-day window.
The Palm Harbor location's seven high-severity violations remain the defining number in this data set. No other Burger King location in Florida logged as many high-severity citations in the same period, and the chain recorded zero emergency closures statewide during the same window. Whether the Palm Harbor findings triggered a follow-up inspection, and what that inspection found, is not reflected in the records reviewed.
