BVA9506066 
DOCKET NO.  93-13 728     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Phoenix,
Arizona

THE ISSUE

Entitlement to a temporary total disability rating based upon the
need for convalescence

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: Veterans of Foreign Wars of the
United States

REMAND

The veteran had active duty from December 1964 to October 1968.

Service connection was established for postoperative residuals of
right knee lateral meniscectomy and degenerative changes.  The
regional office denied a temporary total disability evaluation
following a recent operative procedure because there had been an
intercurrent injury.  However, service connection was not denied
for any particular disability.  In this regard, the evidence
reflects that an operative procedure, in 1972, disclosed a torn
medial meniscus, an old tear of the anterior cruciate ligament,
and a lax medial collateral ligament.

The 1992 operative report noted a medial meniscus tear, severe
changes of the articular cartilage at the site of the previous
meniscectomy, and medial collateral ligament instability.

It appears that many of the findings noted in 1992 were similar
to the findings noted in 1972.  Since service connection has not
been denied for any particular right knee disability, the Board
concludes that the issue of entitlement to service connection for
anterior cruciate ligament disability and medial collateral
ligament disability is inextricably intertwined with the issue of
entitlement to a temporary total disability evaluation based on a
period of convalescence.

To ensure full compliance with due process requirements, the case
is REMANDED to the regional office (RO) for the following
development:

1.  Inasmuch as the issue of entitlement to
service connection for anterior cruciate
ligament disability and medial collateral
ligament disability is deemed to be
"inextricably intertwined" with the issue
of entitlement to a temporary total
disability evaluation, the RO should take
appropriate adjudicative action and provide
the appellant and representative notice of
the determination and the right to appeal.
If a timely notice of disagreement is
filed, the appellant and representative
should be furnished with a statement of the
case and given time to respond thereto.

2.  The rating decision must consider all
the evidence of record and compare the 1992
findings with the 1972 findings.

Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board, if in
order.  The Board intimates no opinion as to the ultimate outcome
of this case.  The appellant need take no action unless otherwise
notified.

          H. N. SCHWARTZ
          Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals

The Board of Veterans' Appeals Administrative Procedures
Improvement Act, Pub. L. No. 103-271, § 6, 108 Stat. 740, ___
(1994), permits a proceeding instituted before the Board to be
assigned to an individual member of the Board for a
determination.  This proceeding has been assigned to an
individual member of the Board.

Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 1991), only a decision of the
Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States
Court of Veterans Appeals.  This remand is in the nature of a
preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the Board
on the merits of your appeal.  38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (1993).