WASHINGTON — The Trump administration is preparing to lift a controversial ban on the transfer of some military surplus equipment to police departments. The halt in battlefield-style response to rioting in a St. Louis suburb three years ago prompted a halt to the program by President Obama.

Never mind the fact that it was needed, the appearance shocked the conscience of some who are unwilling to concede the need. Law enforcement is facing greater threats, and safety equipment offered by the military is a huge benefit.

The new plan, outlined in documents obtained by USA TODAY, would roll back an Obama administration executive order that blocked armored vehicles, large-caliber weapons, ammunition and other heavy equipment from being re-purposed from foreign battlefields to America’s streets.

On Monday, Attorney General Jeff Sessions is scheduled to address the annual meeting of the Fraternal Order of Police, the nation’s largest police union, and he may outline the program changes there.

Administration officials did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

However, the administration’s action would restore “the full scope of a longstanding program for recycling surplus, lifesaving gear from the Department of Defense, along with restoring the full scope of grants used to purchase this type of equipment from other sources,” according to an administration summary of the new program recently circulated to some law enforcement groups.

“Assets that would otherwise be scrapped can be re-purposed to help state, local and tribal law enforcement better protect public safety and reduce crime.”

Many law enforcement organizations have lobbied for a reversal of Obama’s policy. They’ve argued that access to this equipment was needed to better respond to increasing social unrest and violence. Moreover, many smaller agencies simply do not have budgeted monies for this kind of capital expense.

The practice of military surplus incurred a black eye in 2014 during the Ferguson riots, according to groups that were unsupportive law enforcement efforts.

The deployment of such equipment, President Obama argued at the time, cast the police as an “occupying force,” deepening a divide between police and a wary community.

“We’ve seen how militarized gear can sometimes give people a feeling like they’re an occupying force, as opposed to a force that’s part of the community that’s protecting them and serving them,” Obama said in announcing the ban in 2015.

The military gear ban was among a host of policing reform recommendations to flow from a White House advisory group formed in the aftermath of the Ferguson rioting.

The Task Force on 21st Century Policing, chaired by former Philadelphia Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey and Laurie Robinson, a former assistant attorney general, called on law enforcement officials to “minimize the appearance of a military operation” when policing mass demonstrations.

“Avoid using provocative tactics and equipment that undermine civilian trust,” the task force urged.

Yet the people making these recommendations are not the officers in harms way. Perhaps if they were as aggressively dissuading the actions of rioters as they were of the police response, the equipment would not be necessary. But it is.

The surplus sharing agreement, also known as the “1033 program,” was created by Congress nearly 30 years ago as part of the National Defense Authorization Act. It was originally intended to assist local law enforcement in drug investigations.

The program was expanded in 1997 to include all local law enforcement operations, including counter-terrorism. Since then, according to the government, more than $5 billion in gear has been transferred to state, local and tribal law enforcement agencies.

“Much of the equipment provided through the 1033 program is entirely defensive in nature … that protects officers in active shooter scenarios and other dangerous situations,” the Trump administration proposal says.