Thanks. That's another very good question.
Yet again this underlines the uniqueness of military justice. As you're aware, our current judges.... We have four military judges who are appointed for tenure, or hopefully will be with the passing of this; right now they're appointed for five-year periods.
If for some reason the force suddenly expanded to, say, double its current size, or we were engaged in a much broader global campaign and we needed more judges to sit in courts martial, the only other solution would be simply to appoint more judges.
Then, when that “surge”, if I can use that term, were over, you might have expanded from four judges up to, say, 20 or 25 judges. Now you would have a lot of judges with not a lot more work to do.
The theory is that we would have the ability, through appointing reserve judges on a panel if required, to handle a surge when necessary. It would give an extra built-in judging capability. If we didn't need it, then of course those judges would still remain in their civilian capacity, working as judges. But if there were that surge, we could then turn them into military judges without then having to maintain them for the rest of their careers. In some cases, it could be many years, regrettably, when they wouldn't be that busy.