However, Taipower did not award the contract to a single architect/engineering firm; instead, they split the procurement among multiple vendors, complicating project management and increasing costs.

[3] The reactor is designed by General Electric, but is supported by Hitachi, Shimizu Corporation, Toshiba, and other American, Taiwanese, and other Chinese and international companies.

Taipower, however, did not award the contract to a single architect/engineer, but hired General Electric to build the reactors, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries to supply the turbines and the generators, and other contractors for the rest,[7] making the project difficult to manage.

[10] President Chen Shui-bian was elected along with other Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators in March 2000 on an anti-nuclear platform which included stopping plant construction.

[2][11] DPP legislators called for a halt to the project in April 2000,[12] which led to the suspension of construction in October 2000 by Premier Chang Chun-hsiung when it was approximately 10–30% complete,[13] only to restart the following year.

[24] The temporary cancellation by the Government and other project management difficulties caused significant delays, pushing the price tag of the plant to more than US$7.5 billion by 2009.

However, due to the politically sensitive nature of the Fourth Nuclear Plant issue, legislatively-referred and voter-referred referendums had failed to enter the national ballot.

[27] The proposed referendum was sponsored by 32 KMT lawmakers led by Lee Ching-hua[28] and asked "Do you agree that the construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant should be halted and that it not become operational?

[30] The opposition DPP claimed that getting better than 50% voter turnout in a non-Presidential election year was too difficult, and barricaded the legislative chamber to prevent a vote to place the Lee referendum on the national ballot.

[41] The language of the Kao referendum was formulated to require positive action: "Do you agree to allow Taiwan Power Co to insert fuel rods into the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant in New Taipei City for a test run" so poor voter turnout would result in referendum defeat, and thus create binding opposition to starting the plant.

[43] The ruling KMT stated the purpose of a new referendum was to have the people decide the plant's fate while weighing the consequences of not bringing a major power source on-line.

[45] Meanwhile, also in April 2014, the opposition DPP planned to introduce special legislation to bypass the provisions of the Referendum Act, allowing a simple majority vote (with no threshold of participation) to decide the plant's fate.

[46] Premier Jiang Yi-huah cited the prior 2000 precedent when construction was interrupted by executive order which was later ruled unconstitutional[47] as the reason why he rejected the proposed special legislation.

The Executive Yuan stated the plant could start operations if the referendum on halting construction was not held, assuming safety tests were passed first.

Minister of Economic Affairs Chang Chia-juch said, "Passing the rigorous review illustrates the high standards of care invested in the design and construction of the facility.

[52] The Ministry of Economic Affairs proposed in August 2014 that further construction be halted for three years until a national referendum could be held;[53] Taipower estimated the three-year cost of sealing Unit 1 as less than NT$2 billion.

[57][58] Taipower stated it would take at least six years to start commercial operations at Unit 1 due to fuel removal, obsolescence of components in the ABWR NSSS, and startup testing.

[61]: xi A Generation III nuclear reactor has a 72-hour capability of passive cooling to prevent damage to its core should the plant face a total blackout after an emergency shut down.