It would be helpful to have the option of "do not purge if there are active requests".

This would be very helpful to clear out patron information that is no longer needed (and fulfill a library's duty to protect patron privacy) as well as making sure that requests are not orphaned while active/in progress.

I'm adding the results of some testing I've completed today in the sandboxes.

Home patron has three requests at another AFN institution. Those requests are in three states.

1) Request Placed (item library staff not yet processed).
2) Request Filled (item library staff has scanned the item in for transit; not yet arrived at patron's pick-up location)
3) Request On Hold (item has been scanned in for hold at the patron's pick-up location)

Alma allows the linked user record in the items' home library to be purged.

What happens to the requests?:

1) Request Placed (item library staff not yet processed): This request is auto-promoted to another AFN member institution, if another institution is available in the lender string.

2) Request Filled (item library staff has scanned the item in for transit; not yet arrived at patron's pick-up location): The request vanishes in Alma. The patron is not notified that their request will not be fulfilled. The item remains in transit status at the item's home institution; when scanned in at the patron's pick up library, the item asks to be transited home for reshelving. The patron is not notified.

3) Request On Hold (item has been scanned in for hold at the patron's pick-up location): The patron is not notified that their request has been erased from their account. The item is still physically sitting on the hold shelf at the patron's pick-up location, but the request no longer displays on the pickup location library's "Active Hold Shelf" list in Alma. At the item's home institution, the item shows as "on hold" at the patron's pick-up location.

Today, Alma did allow the library staff to still complete the loan to the requesting patron, but in past testing, Alma would not permit the loan to occur since it was "on hold for another patron." While more testing will need to be done to confirm the current behavior is consistent, the lack of accountability in Alma for the hold transaction remains concerning in either case.

For institutions who use the AFN, having the option of "do not purge if there are active requests" would be helpful!

Please support this idea. It makes no sense that users with active requests would be able to be purged, thus orphaning their requests in the system. Since coming online as an Alma library in mid-2020, we have built up thousands of linked user records via the AFN that we and our consortium have not been able to purge as best practice for PII would dictate (for reasons described by previous comments below).

In the November 2025 release, Ex Libris did add the ability to "pure users by set" (https://knowledge.exlibrisgroup.com/Alma/Product_Documentation/010Alma_Online_Help_(English)/050Administration/070Managing_Jobs/020Manual_Jobs_on_Defined_Sets#:~:text=purges+users+for+a+specified+set.+)

While this new job has a lot of potential for being valuable to more-carefully purge the intended users, there is still not an easy (less timed-labor-intensive) way in Alma to identify users with active requests to not include in either the traditional user record purge, or the new purge by set.

Since Analytics is static data as of the previous night, library/consortial staff would need to run an API report to identify which purge-eligible users do not have any active requests, and immediately turn around and run the purge to remove those user records.

We recognize that typically, a library would be purging their own local user records only after the patron is no longer active/enrolled/associated with the institution.

However, in an Automated Fulfillment Network, we want to be able to regularly purge LINKED user records that are no longer active at an item's institution because the patron's transactions have completed, so that patron data is not sitting around in other IZs in the consortium after the linked user record is no longer currently in use. But, those patrons may still be active/enrolled/associated at their HOME institution. And, since those patrons are still active/enrolled/associated at their HOME institution, that patron could place a new active request at any moment. Thus, their linked-user record should not be purged if they place a new active request (since the linked user record is once again in use).

Since active requests are not a way to prevent the purge of a user record, (and since we cannot rely on analytics reports), it means that we must generate via API the "unused" linked user record list, and then there can be zero delay between generating that list and running the user record purge job to clear the linked users. This is a very staff labor intensive, and time-intensive process in large consortia using the AFN.

It is poor customer service to delete the linked user record of a patron with an active request; when this happens, the patron will be unable to have their request fulfilled.

I agree- I've tried to submit this through the NERS/CERV cycle a few times, but it has not yet gotten enough traction to move forward. Here is what I'd written in the submission:

User Purge should not delete users with active requests.

---Describe the functionality being requested:

The Alma User Purge job currently deletes users with active requests. Alma should allow for active requests to prevent user record purge.

---Business reasons that reflect the community or how all customers would benefit:

It is possible that the only purge-prevention activity that a user may have is an active request (local, or AFN). When purging linked user records in a fulfillment network, sometimes the only activity that a linked user record may currently have is an active request (a request that is in the pick-from-shelf queue, in transit for hold, or on the active hold shelf); the requested item may be committed for the patron’s use, but not yet checked out to their account.

---Technical Requirements:

Alma already checks the user record for these settings, and the user record is eligible to be purged, if:

Balance due on their local account is below “waive threshold”
No outstanding local loans.
No assigned PO lines, POs, or invoices.
No locked bibliographic records.
No assigned import profiles.
Not working in the MD Editor.
Not currently locked by a running job.
No associated assets or grants (If Esploro is enabled for your institution)

Ex Libris should be able to add “No active requests” to this list of checked criteria.

---User Story:

The patron may have already been notified that the item is on hold for their pickup, but if their linked user record is purged in the item’s home library as part of cleanup while the item is on hold, the patron will become unable to check out the item.

---Documentation:
Support case https://support.proquest.com/s/case/5003r00001XLMSWAA5/patron-purge-not-aware-of-active-requestson-hold-items?tabset-9b93c=2