Oregon released their Notice of Allegations from the NCAA and mostly it was old news. The violations were essentially the same as what was discussed in the summary disposition report. The disagreement over the status of the scouting service violation (secondary vs. major) appears to be the sticking point that lead the Committee on Infractions to not approve the summary disposition findings and penalties.
But the timeline of the case after the summary disposition agreement fell apart is interesting. The letter from the NCAA enforcement staff essentially asked Oregon for an expedited response and hearing. Rather than the traditional 90 days, Oregon was asked to submit a response in 30 days, with a hearing scheduled at the Committee on Infractions’s February meeting. But given that Oregon met with the COI in April, the most likely explanation is that Oregon requested the full 90 days to prepare its response.
The article about the letter also points to an NCAA rule which says repeat violators are not allowed to use the summary disposition process. But that rule was changed in 2010, via a policies & procedures proposal PP-2010-1. Now repeat violators may elect the summary disposition process, subject to the agreement of the enforcement staff and ultimately the Committee on Infractions.