"Contract dispute." The ship was under contract with the Department of Homeland Security, and was supposed to be completed last year but was not. I have not found the reasons for this delay, but it appears to have been problems within the shipyard. The new political leadership has launched a Coast Guard restructuring program, with other ships like the Offshore Patrol Cutter and Icebreakers as higher priorities. It then decided to terminate the contract, and spend the money elsewhere. A negotiated settlement was reached. Much of the money was returned, while a portion of it is to be spent on spare parts for the NSCs that are in service.

I agree that likely troubles within the shipyard do not bode well when it comes to choosing this vessel and yard for the frigate. I wish I could find more details, but all the articles are basically repeating the same basic info. This is a typical article:

https://maritime-executive.com/article/trump-s-homeland-security-dept-cancels-order-for-incomplete-uscg-cutter

The Navy and political leadership do seem focused on correcting problems which are plaguing the shipyards. This frigate would also be a different contract, thus a "fresh start" of sorts. The yard managed to crank out 10 NSCs before things somehow bogged down. It looks "revivable" IF "handled correctly." There's the rub, then. On the other hand, any single program we select has plenty of pitfalls, and all need to be "handled correctly." No guarantees for anything. But, we have got to try something. Critics are always plentiful, so "nothing we do will be right"...until something works out right.

There's a scene in the movie "The Dirty Dozen."

Pinkley's gonna be a general!
What!?
Pinkley's gonna be a general!
What!?
Shut up and watch!

That seems to be about where we're at.