Bondex Black Plastic Roof Cement / Bondex Black Mastic Roof Cement / Stays White Mobile Home Roof Coating

Product Description

Bondex International manufactured a line of roofing and coating products sold under several related brand names from approximately 1968 through 1981. These products — marketed as Bondex Black Plastic Roof Cement, Bondex Black Mastic Roof Cement, and Stays White Mobile Home Roof Coating — were commercial-grade sealants and protective coatings designed for application on flat or low-slope roofing systems, as well as on the distinctive metal roofs common to manufactured and mobile homes throughout that era.

Roof cement and mastic products of this type served as all-purpose waterproofing compounds. Installers used them to seal seams and joints, patch deteriorating roofing membranes, flash around roof penetrations such as vents and chimneys, and coat entire roof surfaces to extend service life. The Stays White variant was marketed specifically to owners of mobile homes, a rapidly growing segment of the housing market during the 1960s and 1970s. These units often featured thin aluminum or galvanized steel roofs prone to leaking and thermal stress, making a durable roof coating a practical maintenance product with broad consumer appeal.

Bondex International was a subsidiary of Reardon Company and later came under the ownership of RPM, Inc., the specialty coatings conglomerate. The Bondex product line was distributed nationally through hardware stores, roofing supply distributors, and building material retailers, giving these products wide circulation among professional roofers, general contractors, maintenance workers, and do-it-yourself homeowners.

Asbestos Content

Litigation records document that Bondex Black Plastic Roof Cement, Bondex Black Mastic Roof Cement, and Stays White Mobile Home Roof Coating contained chrysotile asbestos as a functional ingredient during the period of approximately 1968 through 1981. Chrysotile, a serpentine-form asbestos mineral, was widely used in roofing mastics and cements during this era because of its fiber reinforcement properties, its resistance to heat and weathering, and its ability to improve the structural cohesion of bituminous compounds.

In roofing mastics, chrysotile fibers were blended into an asphalt or bitumen base along with solvents and mineral fillers. The asbestos fibers prevented the compound from sagging or flowing on vertical surfaces and seams, extended product durability under thermal cycling, and enhanced resistance to cracking. These same physical properties that made chrysotile desirable as an additive made it hazardous to the workers who handled and applied these products.

Plaintiffs alleged that Bondex and related corporate parties were aware of the health hazards associated with asbestos exposure during the years these products were manufactured, yet continued to incorporate chrysotile into their roofing compounds and failed to provide adequate warnings to users.

How Workers Were Exposed

Workers who applied, mixed, or handled Bondex roofing cements and coatings during the products’ years of manufacture and use faced potential exposure to airborne chrysotile asbestos fibers. Although roof cement and mastic products are semi-solid or paste-like in their packaged form, the application process created meaningful exposure risks.

Litigation records document that fiber release occurred during several stages of work. Opening and stirring cans of roof cement disturbed the product and could release fibers into the breathing zone of the worker performing the task. Application by trowel, brush, or mop — particularly vigorous spreading or working of the compound into seams and penetrations — created additional disturbance. Workers applying the Stays White coating to mobile home roofs often worked in close proximity to the product surface in conditions with limited ventilation, which could concentrate airborne fibers near the breathing zone.

Dry or partially cured material presented a different but equally significant hazard. Old applications of asbestos-containing roof cement that had weathered, cracked, or aged became friable over time. Roofers performing maintenance, repair, or reroofing work on surfaces previously coated with Bondex products were exposed to asbestos fibers released during scraping, cutting, grinding, or pressure-washing of the old material. These so-called secondary or disturbance exposures could be intense, particularly when work was performed without respiratory protection.

Plaintiffs alleged that exposure categories included professional roofers applying these products as part of their regular trade work, general laborers and construction workers assisting in roofing operations, maintenance personnel responsible for upkeep of commercial or industrial facilities with flat roofing systems, mobile home owners and service workers who applied or disturbed the Stays White coating, and industrial workers in facilities where these products were stocked and used for facility maintenance.

OSHA’s permissible exposure limit for asbestos has been progressively tightened since the 1970s as scientific understanding of asbestos-related disease developed. Current OSHA standards classify chrysotile as a confirmed human carcinogen with no safe level of occupational exposure established. Asbestos-related diseases attributable to chrysotile exposure include malignant mesothelioma, asbestosis, lung cancer, and other pleural conditions. These diseases characteristically have latency periods of twenty to fifty years between initial exposure and clinical diagnosis, meaning workers exposed to Bondex products during the 1968–1981 production window may be receiving diagnoses today.

No dedicated asbestos trust fund has been established specifically for claims arising from Bondex Black Plastic Roof Cement, Bondex Black Mastic Roof Cement, or Stays White Mobile Home Roof Coating. Bondex International and its parent and successor entities have been named in asbestos personal injury litigation, and plaintiffs alleged injuries resulting from occupational and incidental exposure to asbestos in these products.

Because no product-specific trust fund exists, individuals diagnosed with an asbestos-related disease who believe their illness may be connected to exposure to Bondex roofing products should consult with an attorney who specializes in asbestos litigation. Legal options that may be available include civil litigation against Bondex International’s former corporate parents or successors, claims against other manufacturers whose asbestos-containing products contributed to cumulative exposure, and potential claims against the manufacturers of raw chrysotile asbestos supplied for use in these products.

Compensation through the tort system — civil lawsuits — may provide recovery for medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering, and related damages. In cases where a diagnosed individual has died, surviving family members may have standing to pursue wrongful death claims.

Workers and family members seeking legal remedies should gather and preserve documentation of exposure history, including employment records, contractor invoices, product purchase records, photographs of work sites, and the recollections of coworkers or supervisors who can corroborate the presence of Bondex products at specific job sites. Medical documentation of an asbestos-related diagnosis from a qualified pulmonologist or oncologist is a foundational element of any asbestos claim.

Given the long latency period of asbestos-related disease, individuals who worked in roofing trades, mobile home maintenance, or building maintenance during the 1968–1990 period and who have received a diagnosis of mesothelioma, lung cancer, asbestosis, or related pleural disease are encouraged to seek legal consultation promptly, as statutes of limitations apply to asbestos claims and vary by state.