Organic Process Research & Development 2005, 9, 39−44
Minimizing Isobutylene Emissions from Large Scale tert-Butoxycarbonyl
Deprotections
Eric L. Dias,* Kevin W. Hettenbach, and David J. am Ende
Process Safety and Reaction Engineering Laboratory, Pfizer Global Research and DeVelopment,
Eastern Point Road, Groton, Connecticut 06340
Abstract:
with scavengers1,7,8 such as thiophenol1,7 to form an unre-
active byproduct, 3a; however, in an industrial setting, this
can be prohibitive in terms of cost, worker exposure, and
added purification.
Isobutylene off-gas amounts liberated during the methane-
sulfonic acid-catalyzed deprotection of N-BOC-pyrrolidine in
THF, methanol, ethanol, 2-propanol, toluene, and dichlo-
romethane were measured using on-line gas-phase mass spec-
troscopy. While one full equivalent of isobutylene was released
as an off-gas when THF was used as the reaction solvent,
emissions were reduced by 65-95% in other solvents. In alcohol
solvents, the corresponding alkyl tert-butyl ethers are formed
as byproducts of the reaction as expected. In dichloromethane
and toluene, oligomers of isobutylene can be formed under the
reaction conditions. These results provided the basis for
developing an effective acid/toluene scrubber for isobutylene
that was successfully employed on the pilot plant scale.
In the absence of a powerful scavenger, 1 can be trapped
in other manners. When trifluoroacetic acid is used, reaction
with the conjugate base can form the tert-butyl trifluoroac-
6,7,8a,9
etate ester, 3b;
however this typically will not occur
with methanesulfonic or other nonnucleophilic strong acids.
It has also been noted that water and alcohols will encourage
2a,11b
formation of tert-butyl alcohol
tert-butyl ethers, 3c,
or the corresponding alkyl
10,11
which may provide a practical
approach to reducing isobutylene emissions but will be
somewhat limited by potential functional group incompat-
ibilities.
Initially, we set out to measure isobutylene emissions from
BOC deprotections in different solvents with two goals. First,
we wanted to identify solvents that produce high isobutylene
emissions, and second, we wished to measure the isobutylene
trapping efficiency of different alcohol solvents. To this end,
we decided to use on-line mass spectrometry to indepen-
dently measure the amounts of both carbon dioxide and
Introduction
The tert-butoxycarbonyl (BOC) fragment is commonly
used throughout organic synthesis as a protecting group for
1,2
amines. The BOC group is typically removed under acidic
conditions1 in a wide variety of solvents, and one potential
-3
2,4
organic byproduct of this process is isobutylene, which is
a VOC subject to regulation by the EPA. Because iso-
5
12
isobutylene released from the reaction in real-time, since
butylene has a boiling point (bp) of -6.9 °C, allowing it to
pass through most process condensers uncontrolled and vent
to the atmosphere in the absence of suitable end-of-line
devices, emissions must be dealt with accordingly before a
process can be run on a manufacturing scale.
t
Scheme 1. Byproducts of BOC deprotection
The generally accepted mechanism for BOC deprotection
is shown below (Scheme 1):2 Protonation of the carbonyl
oxygen of the tert-butyl carbamate results in degradation to
initially produce the unprotected amine, carbon dioxide, and
,6
2
a,6,7
the highly reactive tert-butyl cation, 1,
which can
decompose to isobutylene, 2,2 in the absence of suitable
,4
trapping reagents. On laboratory scale, 1 is often trapped
*
To whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: eric_l_dias@
groton.pfizer.com.
(
1) Greene, T. W.; Wuts, P. G. M. ProtectiVe Groups in Organic Synthesis,
rd ed.; Wiley: New York, 1999; pp 518-525.
3
(2) (a) Lawrence, S. A. Chimica Oggi 1999, 15-20. (b) Carpino, L. A. Acc.
Chem. Res. 1973, 6, 191-198. (c) Carpino, L. A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1957,
7
9, 98-101.
3) Strazzolini, P.; Melloni, T.; Giumanini, A. G. Tetrahedron 2001, 57, 9033-
043.
(8) (a) Bodanszky, M.; Bodanszky, A. Int. J. Pept. Protein Res. 1984, 23, 565-
572. (b) Masui, Y.; Chino, N.; Sakakibara, S. Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 1980,
53, 464-468.
(
(
9
4) Kaiser, E., Sr.; Tam, J. P.; Kubiak, T. M.; Merrifield, R. B. Tetrahedron
Lett. 1988, 29, 303-306.
5) C. F. R. 51.100 (s).
(9) Latremouille, G. A.; Eastham, A. M. Can. J. Chem. 1967, 45, 11-16.
(10) (a) Evans, T. W.; Edlund, K. R. Ind. Eng. Chem. 1936, 28, 1186-1188.
(b) Sola, L.; Pericas, M. A.; Cunill, F.; Izquierdo, J. F. Ind. Eng. Chem.
Res. 1997, 36, 2012-2018.
(11) (a) Di Girolamo, M. et al. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 1997, 36, 4452-4458. (b)
Tejero, J.; Calderon, A.; Cunill, F.; Izauierdo, J. F.; Iborra, M. React. Funct.
Polym. 1997, 33, 201-209.
(
(
6) Losse, Gl; Zeidler, D.; Grieshaber, T. Liebigs Ann. Chem. 1968, 715, 196-
2
03.
(7) Lundt, B. F.; Johansen, N. L.; Volune, A.; Markussen, J. Int. J. Pept. Protein
Res. 1978, 12, 258-268.
1
0.1021/op049837v CCC: $30.25 © 2005 American Chemical Society
Vol. 9, No. 1, 2005 / Organic Process Research & Development
•
39
Published on Web 12/15/2004