Author: Collie

Dáil Éireann Written Answers 07/09/18 – Department of Defence

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

QUESTION NO: 33

To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence if there are restrictions on military leave for the week commencing 18 September 2018; the barracks and number affected; the reasons for same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. 36676/18

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)

The day-to-day operational management of Defence Forces personnel is a matter, in the first instance, for the appropriate military authorities. The Defence Forces operates on a 24 hours a day, 365 days a year basis and this means that, on occasion, military leave has to be restricted for operational reasons.

The approval of annual leave is a matter for the military authorities in line with the operational requirements of the Defence Forces.

The Ministerial Review of the 58th Infantry Group who are due to deploy to UNDOF the following week will be held on the 19th September.

The Air Corp’s Annual General Officer Commanding inspection will take place on 21 September 2018 and some units will hold Unit Inspections on 17 and 18 September 2018.

DELAY – DENY – DIE

University of Limerick students exposed to Irish Air Corp toxic chemicals over decades

The University of Limerick sent 3 engineering students a year, from about 1990 to 2008, for work experience at the Irish Air Corps at Casement Aerodrome, Baldonnel.

During their work experience all the UL students were  exposed to a range of CMR chemicals in an unprotected manner and at levels known by the Air Corps to be over airborne health and safety limits.

To date the University of Limerick have refused to alert their former students to the fact that they were overexposed to toxic chemicals including Trichloroethylene, Trichloroethane, Dichloromethane, Hexamethylene Diisocyanate, Toluene, Xylene, Benzene, Hexavalent Chromium and many more.

Like their military counterparts that served during the same time period some of the UL students have been injured by their time serving in the Irish Air Corps. They all need to be informed of their exposure so that those suffering can receive appropriate medical help.

The actions of the University of Limerick on this issue to date have been shameful.

http://www.thejournal.ie/college-guide-ul-4181613-Aug2018/

Dáil Éireann Written Answers 12/07/18 – Department of Defence – Departmental Legal Costs

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

QUESTION NO: 66

To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence the estimated costs of defending litigation on Lariam and Air Corps toxic chemical exposure in each year over the past ten years, excluding settlements; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32063/18]

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)

The State Claims Agency manages and provides legal representation in relation to personal injury claims taken against the Minister including claims in respect of current or former members of the Defence Forces in relation to alleged personal injuries that are referred to in the Deputy’s question.

The Department reimburses the State Claims Agency in respect of any external legal costs. This Department does not hold details of the breakdown of the legal costs incurred in respect of the different categories of personal injuries claims managed by the State Claims Agency on behalf of my Department.

*****

  • The state claims agency were aware from 2013/2014 that the Irish Air Corps toxic chemical exposure problem was still a LIVE issue and not just a LEGACY issue. They had an opportunity at this time to inform the HSA and to start to have the ongoing exposure problems rectified but they chose not to do so.
  • The state claims agency are therefore directly responsible for personnel enduring a further 2 years (approx) of unprotected exposure.
  • The State Claims Agency are in charge of their own cover up and have unlimited taxpayer funds to carry out this task.

DELAY – DENY – DIE

Department of Defence coy on probe of bullying claims

An air corps whistleblower has been told that it is “difficult to envisage” how the Department of Defence would investigate complaints of bullying made in a protected disclosure about chemical exposure within the force.

The protected disclosure, seen by the Irish Examiner, contains allegations that the whistle-blower was doused in chemicals used to service aircraft as an initiation, and was frequently exposed to chemicals without protective equipment as he carried out his duties in the Engine Shop at Casement Aerodrome, Baldonnel.

He alleges that he became ill while still serving in the air corps, but was targeted by superiors for his frequent absences due to sickness.

His complaints match those of a number of other whistleblowers, and the State is currently facing at least seven separate legal actions from former air corps staff who claim they are chronically ill due to their exposure to chemicals at Casement Aerodrome.

A Government-commissioned report by former civil servant Christopher O’Toole into earlier whistleblower disclosures found there was no documentation available to demonstrate that the air corps met its health and safety obligations.

The latest whistleblower called on the Government to launch a fresh review into the complaints about conditions in Casement Aerodrome, and asked that his allegations of bullying be considered as part of this probe.

“My allegations need to be investigated in full as part of a wider investigation into the air corps chemical exposure scandal and the subsequent bullying and mistreatment of personnel injured by the same chemical exposure,” states the whistle blower.

Read full article on Irish Examiner website below…

Delay – Deny – Die

No response to latest Air Corps whistleblower claim

The Government has not responded to a new protected disclosure on chemical exposures within the Air Corps.

The disclosure was made by a whistleblower, who says he is chronically ill, due to his experiences at Casement Aerodrome, the Irish Examiner can reveal.

The protected disclosure, seen by this newspaper, was submitted to the Department of Defence last December, but the whistleblower has not been contacted since, bar an acknowledgement that his disclosure was received.

In the December 2017 disclosure, the former member of staff echoes previous submissions to the Government. He says he was doused in chemicals by other recruits colleagues, as an initiation, and was frequently exposed to various chemicals as part of his duties in the engine shop at Casement Aerodrome, Baldonnel.

He alleges that he became ill while still serving in the Air Corps, but was bullied and mistreated by superiors for his frequent absences, due to illnesses he believes were caused by his working environment.

Read full article on Irish Examiner website below…

Delay – Deny – Die

Dáil Éireann – Oral Question 38 – 26th June 2018 – Irish Air Corps Protected Disclosure

Mr. Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South-Central )

Question No. 38

To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence if he has received a protected disclosure from a member of the  Defence Forces (details supplied); if he has responded to the disclosure; and the action that has been taken on foot of the disclosure. — Aengus Ó Snodaigh. [27762/18]

*****

To be clear Minister Paul Kehoe & Taoiseach Leo Varadkar received this Protected Disclosure in December 2017, issued a receipt and have ignored since. 

Study of Health Outcomes in Aircraft Maintenance Personnel (SHOAMP)

A research team from the University of Newcastle (Australia) has completed an investigation into whether there is an association between adverse health and an involvement in F-111 fuel tank deseal/reseal activities and, if so, the nature and strength of that association.

The current health status of those workers was compared with the health of groups of workers with similar backgrounds from Amberley and Richmond air bases.

Yield of literature review

Associations between exposure and health outcomes
  • Cancer
  • Multiple Sclerosis, Motor Neurone Disease and Other Neurological Examinations
  • Other Neurological Outcomes
  • Neuropsychology
  • Reproductive Health Effects
  • Other health effects
  • Health and the Manufacture and Maintenance of Aircraft
Measurement of exposure and outcomes
  • Bio-markers
  • Measurement of Neuropsychological Deficits
Summary of Results and Implications for General Health and Medical Study
  • Cancer
  • Multiple Sclerosis, Motor Neurone Disease and other Neurological Effects
  • Birth Defects
  • Neuropsychology
  • Other Health Effects
  • Biomarkers

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.468.8401&rep=rep1&type=pdf

*****

When the RAAF and the Australian Government discovered there was a chemical exposure problem and associated health problems amongst aircraft maintenance personnel they initiated some health studies one of which became known as SHOAMP. These studies are ongoing and report every 4 years to the best of our knowledge.

Australia does have a Department of Veteran Affairs and operates schemes whereby medical & financial support are in place to support RAAF personnel affected by the F1-11 Deseal / Reseal program.

These schemes are far from perfect and are a cause of ongoing stress amongst Australian survivors but obviously preferable to Ireland where Irish Air Corps sick personnel have to risk their home to take the the state to court while our compassionate medically qualified Taoiseach (Prime Minister) Leo Varadkar recently refused medical help for Air Corps personnel in the Irish parliament and goaded sick survivors to sue.

Any person who served in the Irish Army Air Corps needs to read the above document which is the 2003 SHOAMP report. Unfortunately many links on the Australian DVA website are down. As we find newer SHOAMP reports we will make them available. 

Epichlorohydrin – Guide to Hazardous Air Pollutants used by the Irish Air Corps

Epichlorohydrin
(1-Chloro-2,3-Epoxypropane)

CAS  106-89-8

Hazard Summary

Epichlorohydrin is mainly used in the production of epoxy resins.  Acute (short-term) inhalation exposure to epichlorohydrin in the workplace has caused irritation to the eyes, respiratory tract, and skin of workers.

At high levels of exposure, nausea, vomiting, cough, labored breathing, inflammation of the lung, pulmonary edema, and renal lesions may be observed in humans.

Chronic (long-term) occupational exposure of humans to epichlorohydrin in air is associated with high levels of respiratory tract illness and hematological effects.

Damage to the nasal passages, respiratory tract and kidneys have been observed in rodents exposed to epichlorohydrin by inhalation for acute or chronic duration.  An increased incidence of tumors of the nasal cavity has been observed in rats exposed by inhalation. EPA has classified epichlorohydrin as a Group B2, probable human carcinogen.

Please Note: The main sources of information for this fact sheet are EPA's IRIS (2), which contains information on inhalation chronic toxicity and carcinogenic effects of epichlorohydrin and the RfC, and unit cancer risk estimate for inhalation exposure, and the Health and Environmental Effects Profile for Epichlorohydrin. (1)

Uses

  • The primary use of epichlorohydrin is in the production of epoxy resins used in coatings, adhesives, and plastics. (1,5)
  • Epichlorohydrin is also used in the manufacture of synthetic glycerine, textiles, paper, inks and dyes, solvents, surfactants, and pharmaceuticals. (1)
  • Epichlorohydrin is also listed as an inert ingredient in commercial pesticides. (1)

Sources and Potential Exposure

  • Individuals are most likely to be exposed to epichlorohydrin in the workplace. (1)
  • Epichlorohydrin may be released to the ambient air during its production and use. (1)
  • Accidental releases to waterways may expose the general public to epichlorohydrin. (1)

Assessing Personal Exposure

  • No information was located concerning the measurement of personal exposure to epichlorohydrin.

Health Hazard Information

Acute Effects:

  • Acute inhalation exposure to epichlorohydrin in the workplace has caused irritation to the eyes, respiratory tract, and skin of workers.  At high levels of exposure, nausea, vomiting, cough, labored breathing, chemical pneumonitis (inflammation of the lung), pulmonary edema, and renal lesions may be observed in humans. (1,2)
  • Dermal contact with epichlorohydrin may result in irritation and burns of the skin in humans and animals.(1)
  • In rats and mice acutely exposed to epichlorohydrin by inhalation, nasal and lower respiratory tract irritation and lesions, hemorrhage, and severe edema have been observed.  Renal degeneration and CNS depression with paralysis of respiration and cardiac arrest have also resulted from acute inhalation exposure in animals. (1-3)
  • Tests involving acute exposure of rats, mice and rabbits have demonstrated epichlorohydrin to have high acute toxicity from inhalation, oral, and dermal exposure. (4)

Chronic Effects (Noncancer):

  • Chronic occupational exposure of humans to epichlorohydrin in air is associated with high levels of respiratory tract illness and hematological effects (decreased hemoglobin concentration and decreased erythrocyte and leukocyte counts). (1,5)
  • Chronic inhalation exposure has been observed to cause pulmonary effects including inflammation and degenerative changes in the nasal epithelia, severe lung congestion, and pneumonia in rats and mice. Effects to the kidneys were also observed. (1,2)
  • Hepatic damage, hematological effects, myocardial changes, and damage to the CNS have been reported in chronically exposed rats. (1,5)
  • The Reference Concentration (RfC) for epichlorohydrin is 0.001 milligrams per cubic meter (mg/m3) basedon changes in the nasal turbinates in rats and mice. The RfC is an estimate (with uncertainty spanningperhaps an order of magnitude) of a continuous inhalation exposure to the human population (including sensitive subgroups), that is likely to be without appreciable risk of deleterious noncancer effects during a lifetime. It is not a direct estimator of risk but rather a reference point to gauge the potential effects. At exposures increasingly greater than the RfC, the potential for adverse health effects increases. Lifetime exposure above the RfC does not imply that an adverse health effect would necessarily occur. (2)
  • EPA has medium confidence in the study on which the RfC was based because of the inflammation in the respiratory tract of control and exposed animals although it was well conducted and contained detailed histopathological examinations of numerous tissues including the respiratory tract; medium confidence in the database because chronic studies that adequately address the respiratory system and a two-generation reproductive study are lacking and the only chronic inhalation study is confounded by severe nasal inflammation in the controls; and, consequently, medium confidence in the RfC. (2)
  • The provisional Reference Dose (RfD) for epichlorohydrin is 0.002 milligrams per kilogram body weight per day (mg/kg/d) based on kidney effects in rats. The provisional RfD is a value that has had some form of Agency review, but it does not appear on IRIS (6)

Reproductive/Developmental Effects:

  • In humans occupationally exposed to epichlorohydrin, effects on sperm counts, hormone levels, and fertility have been not detected. (1,2)
  • Epichlorohydrin has been demonstrated to reduce fertility in male rats when inhaled or administered orally.(1-3)
  • Teratogenic effects (birth defects) have not been observed in studies of rodents exposed by inhalation or ingestion. (1,2,5)

Cancer Risk:

  • An increased incidence of lung cancer mortality (not statistically significant) was reported in one study of workers exposed to epichlorohydrin. (1,2)
  • An increased incidence of tumors of the nasal cavity has been observed in rats exposed to epichlorohydrin by inhalation. (1,2,5)
  • An increased incidence of forestomach tumors has been reported in rats exposed via gavage (experimentally placing the chemical in the stomach) and in drinking water.  Mice have exhibited local tumors when exposed by subcutaneous injection. (1-3,5)
  • EPA has classified epichlorohydrin as a Group B2, probable human carcinogen. (2)
  • EPA uses mathematical models, based on human and animal studies, to estimate the probability of a EPA uses mathematical models, based on human and animal studies, to estimate the probability of a person developing cancer from breathing air containing a specified concentration of a chemical. EPA calculated an inhalation unit risk estimate of 1.2 × 10-6  (µg/m3)-1. EPA estimates that, if an individual were to continuously breathe air containing epichlorohydrin at an average of 0.8 µg/m3 (0.0008 mg/m3) over hisor her entire lifetime, that person would theoretically have no more than a one-in-a-million increasedchance of developing cancer as a direct result of breathing air containing this chemical. Similarly, EPA estimates that breathing air containing 8.0 µg/m3 (0.008 mg/m3) would result in not greater than a one in-a-hundred thousand increased chance of developing cancer, and air containing 80.0 µg/m3 (0.08mg/m3) would result in not greater than a one-in-ten thousand increased chance of developing cancer. Fora detailed discussion of confidence in the potency estimates, please see IRIS. (2)
  • EPA has calculated an oral cancer slope factor of 9.9 x 10-3 (mg/kg/d)-1. (2)

Physical Properties

  • The chemical formula for epichlorohydrin is C3H5OCl, and its molecular weight is 92.53 g/mol. (1,7)
  • Epichlorohydrin is a volatile and flammable clear liquid at room temperature and is insoluble in water.(1,2,7)
  • The threshold for odor perception of epichlorohydrin is 0.93 parts per million (ppm). Epichlorohydrin has a pungent, garlicky, sweet odor. (2,8) The vapor pressure for epichlorohydrin is 22 mm Hg at 30 °C. (1)

Read the full EPA (USA) PDF on the above Hazardous Air Pollutant with references below.

*****

Relavance to personnel who served in the Air Corps

  • Epichlorohydrin is a component of PR1829b windshield canopy sealant.

There are possibly more chemicals used by the Air Corps that contain Epichlorohydrin. If you know of some let us know in the comments section. 

Bilateral Vestibular Dysfunction Associated With Chronic Exposure to Military Jet Fuel

Abstract

We describe three patients diagnosed with bilateral vestibular dysfunction associated with the jet propellant type-eight (JP-8) fuel exposure. Chronic exposure to aromatic and aliphatic hydrocarbons, which are the main constituents of JP-8 military aircraft jet fuel, occurred over 3–5 years’ duration while working on or near the flight line.

Exposure to toxic hydrocarbons was substantiated by the presence of JP-8 metabolite n-hexane in the blood of one of the cases. The presenting symptoms were dizziness, headache, fatigue, and imbalance. Rotational chair testing confirmed bilateral vestibular dysfunction in all the three patients. Vestibular function improved over time once the exposure was removed.

Bilateral vestibular dysfunction has been associated with hydrocarbon exposure in humans, but only recently has emphasis been placed specifically on the detrimental effects of JP-8 jet fuel and its numerous hydrocarbon constituents. Data are limited on the mechanism of JP-8-induced vestibular dysfunction or ototoxicity.

Early recognition of JP-8 toxicity risk, cessation of exposure, and customized vestibular therapy offer the best chance for improved balance. Bilateral vestibular impairment is under-recognized in those chronically exposed to all forms of jet fuel.

CASE REPORTS

Case 1: Military Flight Refueler

A37-year-old woman presented with several years of progressively worsening continuous dizziness, headache, and fatigue. The dizziness consisted of sensations of spinning, tilting, disequilibrium, and head fullness. She did not report tinnitus or hearing loss. She was employed as a military flight refueler and exposed to JP-8 vapors and exhaust while working full-time on and around a KC-135E tanker aircraft, a plane used for performing in-flight refueling missions. She worked in a large enclosed hangar that housed all but the tail section of the tanker aircraft. During inspection and maintenance of the aircraft, up to 9,750 gallons of fuel would be loaded. Jet fuel vapors were always present in the hangar due to venting, small leaks, and fuel residue. Fuel vapor concentrations were even greater when engine maintenance necessitated removal of fuel filters and fuel components, draining of fuel into buckets, and opening of fuel lines. She worked in engine maintenance with over 4 years of inhalational and dermal exposure to JP-4 and JP-8.

Her examination showed moderately impaired equilibrium to walk only three steps in tandem before taking a sidestep. Romberg testing revealed more sway during eye closure but no falling. Her medical and neurological examinations were normal. There was no spontaneous, gaze, or positional nystagmus. Qualitative head impulse test was not performed at that time.
Cases 2 and 3

The following two patients were employees in a small purchasing warehouse, located 75 feet south of the fight path, which was separated from the blast and heat emissions from jet aircraft engines by a metal-coated and chain-link fence. Neither air conditioning vents nor carpet had not been cleaned or replaced for over a decade. On inspection, the vents were found to be mal-functioning such that air was able to enter the building but unable to escape. Subsequent inspection by the U. S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) confirmed poor ventilation evidenced by carbon dioxide concentrations >1,500ppm (nor-mal <1,000 ppm according to the U.S. Department of Labor). Hydrocarbons discovered in the carpet via an independent analysis using gas chromatography/mass spectrometry included undecane (C11), dodecane (C12), tridecane (C13), tetradecane (C14), and toluene (C8)—all known JP-8 constituents (2). The chemicals present in the office carpet likely reflected poor indoor air quality. Vapor, aerosol, dermal, and eye absorption of JP-8 are presumed.

Case 2: Warehouse Employe 1

A 45-year-old female contracting officer for the National Guard reported several years of imbalance, headache, fatigue, eye and skin irritation, coughing, sinus congestion, recurrent urinary tract infections, chest tightness, irritability, depression, shortness of breath, palpitations, and numbness. She described her dizziness as an intermittent floating and a rightward tilting sensation with imbalance lasting minutes to hours without any particular pattern. She had a history of asthma and allergies including reaction to aspirin causing urticaria and airway obstruction. In 1998, she developed syncope and dizziness though no specific cause was found. She started working in the building in 1994 and worked there full-time for 5 years.

Case 3: Warehouse Employe 2

A 54-year-old female National Guard contract specialist presented with 2 years of intermittent dizziness, blurred vision, and occasional palpitations. Dizziness was experienced at least 3 days a week. She reported intermittent problems with erratic heart beats, cough, sneezing, headaches, fatigue, recurrent sinus infections, upper respiratory tract, and bladder infections. She worked in the purchasing warehouse full-time for 3 years. When away from the workplace her symptoms were improved. After moving with her colleagues into a new building, the frequency of dizziness was lessened.

Human Exposure and Absorption of Jet Fuel

Military duties such as fuel transportation, aircraft fueling and defueling, aircraft maintenance, cold aircraft engine starts, maintenance of equipment and machinery, use of tent heaters, and cleaning or degreasing with fuel may result in jet fuel exposure. Fuel handlers, mechanics, flight line personnel, especially crew chiefs, and even incidental workers remain at risk for developing illness secondary to chronic JP-8 fuel exposure in aerosol, vapor or liquid form. JP-8 is one of the most common occupational chemical exposures in the US military (1).

The Air Force has set recommended exposure limits for JP-8 at 63ppm (447mg/m3 as an 8-h time-weighted average) (22).In addition to exposure by JP-8 vapor inhalation, toxicity may also occur by absorption through the skin, which is proportional to the amount of skin exposed and the duration of exposure (23, 24). In addition to the standard operating procedure and safety guidelines, double gloving, immediate onsite laundering of contaminated/soiled jumpsuits, regular washing of safety goggles and masks, reduced foam handling time, smoking cessation, adequate cross ventilation, and frequent shift breaks may reduce the overall risk of JP-8 induced illness

At this time, OSHA has not determined a legal limit for jet fuels in workroom air. The U.S. National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health set a recommended limit of 100mg/m3 for kerosene in air averaged over a 10-h work day. Multi-organ toxicity has been documented from JP-8 exposure in animal experiments over the past 15 years. More recently, toxicology researchers are investigating the adverse tissue effects of JP-8 jet fuel in concentrations well below permissible exposure limits.

Ultimately, the new data may help us to better understand the emerging genetic, metabolic and inflammatory mechanisms underpinning JP-8 cellular toxicity—including auditory and vestibular toxicity—and lead to a reassessment of the safe JP-8 exposure limits (25, 26).

CONCLUSION

Bilateral vestibular dysfunction in these three patients with prolonged vapor and dermal JP-8 fuel exposure should raise awareness in people with occupations that expose them to jet fuels, liquid hydrocarbons, or organic solvents. Dizziness and mild imbalance may be the main initial symptoms. Early recognition and limiting further exposure as well as treatment with vestibular therapy (32) may improve their function and quality of life


Bilateral Vestibular Dysfunction… (PDF Download Available). Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325175906_Bilateral_Vestibular_Dysfunction_Associated_With_Chronic_Exposure_to_Military_Jet_Propellant_Type-Eight_Jet_Fuel

*****

Difference between Jet A1 & JP-8

Jet fuel, aviation turbine fuel (ATF), or avtur, is a type of aviation fuel designed for use in aircraft powered by gas-turbine engines. It is colorless to straw-colored in appearance. The most commonly used fuels for commercial aviation are Jet A and Jet A-1, which are produced to a standardized international specification. The only other jet fuel commonly used in civilian turbine-engine powered aviation is Jet B, which is used for its enhanced cold-weather performance.

Jet fuel is a mixture of a large number of different hydrocarbons. The range of their sizes (molecular weights or carbon numbers) is defined by the requirements for the product, such as the freezing or smoke point. Kerosene-type jet fuel (including Jet A and Jet A-1) has a carbon number distribution between about 8 and 16 (carbon atoms per molecule); wide-cut or naphtha-type jet fuel (including Jet B), between about 5 and 15.[1]

Additives

The DEF STAN 91-91 (UK) and ASTM D1655 (international) specifications allow for certain additives to be added to jet fuel, including:[13][14]

  • Antioxidants to prevent gumming, usually based on alkylated phenols, e.g., AO-30, AO-31, or AO-37; 
  • Antistatic agents, to dissipate static electricity and prevent sparking; Stadis 450, with dinonylnaphthylsulfonic acid (DINNSA) as a component, is an example
  • Corrosion inhibitors, e.g., DCI-4A used for civilian and military fuels, and DCI-6A used for military fuels;
  • Fuel system icing inhibitor (FSII) agents, e.g., Di-EGME; FSII is often mixed at the point-of-sale so that users with heated fuel lines do not have to pay the extra expense.
  • Biocides are to remediate microbial (i.e., bacterial and fungal) growth present in aircraft fuel systems. Currently, two biocides are approved for use by most aircraft and turbine engine original equipment manufacturers (OEMs); Kathon FP1.5 Microbiocide and Biobor JF.[15]
  • Metal deactivator can be added to remediate the deleterious effects of trace metals on the thermal stability of the fuel. The one allowable additive is N,N’-disalicylidene 1,2-propanediamine.

As the aviation industry’s jet kerosene demands have increased to more than 5% of all refined products derived from crude, it has been necessary for the refiner to optimize the yield of jet kerosene, a high value product, by varying process techniques. New processes have allowed flexibility in the choice of crudes, the use of coal tar sands as a source of molecules and the manufacture of synthetic blend stocks. Due to the number and severity of the processes used, it is often necessary and sometimes mandatory to use additives. These additives may, for example, prevent the formation of harmful chemical species or improve a property of a fuel to prevent further engine wear.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_fuel

JP-8, or JP8 (for “Jet Propellant 8”) is a jet fuel, specified and used widely by the US military. It is specified by MIL-DTL-83133 and British Defence Standard 91-87, and similar to commercial aviation’s Jet A-1, but with the addition of corrosion inhibitor and anti-icing additives.

A kerosene-based fuel, JP-8 is projected to remain in use at least until 2025. It was first introduced at NATO bases in 1978. Its NATO code is F-34.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JP-8