SESAR Concept of Operations in limbo?

One of the more unfortunate developments during the SESAR definition phase concerned the Concept of Operations. At first what passed as the concept was basically inadequate and it was only after the insistence of the airspace users that work started on what in the end became the SESAR Concept of Operations or CONOPS. Peculiarly, it was never really recognized as an official deliverable although, again on the insistence of the airspace users, a reference was inserted in one of the official deliverables that pointed to the CONOPS as the basis of everything else.
Few definition phase documents generated so much debate and even enmity as the CONOPS. Its novel nature and truly forward looking ideas were hailed by some, hated by others. In the end the released version, which was in many ways a compromise between the parties concerned, still contained enough guidance to ensure that a system built to realize it would do justice to the needs of future air traffic management.
And now we jump to the present where rumors abound about the SESAR concept work once again being in trouble. Last I heard, people seem to be saying that the concept is currently a blank box in the SESAR work and there will be no ops concept on the table until 2011. What about the original CONOPS? The answer is an enigmatic: they do not like it any more.

There are a multitude of projects already running in SESAR and if it is true that the original CONOPS is no longer considered the common reference and there is no other concept description to guide things, then history will repeat itself… During the definition phase projects were rushing ahead to meet the deadlines while the CONOPS was still being written. Several cases of mismatches were found but then it was still early and the overall effect was relatively easy to contain. But if in the current phase the projects again proceed without the essential guidance the CONOPS and its derivatives provide, there will be hell to pay.
Being of the curious type, I cannot but wonder where this “they do not like the original CONOPS” thing comes from. Of course, compromise that it was, for some it still went further than they thought it was healthy to innovate. The ranks of nay sayers is not trivial and their influence substantial. Have they caught up with things and are now ready to pull the plug on elements they did not like in the first place either? What does the SJU think about this all?
As I said in the beginning, these are only rumors. But then, where there is smoke, there is fire and the CONPS has been the target of some heavy artillery in the past. May be someone will post a reply and provide some clarification. It would be nice to learn that there is no problem, all the work is proceeding taking the original CONOPS into account…