If by "called out" you imply criticised, then that is not correct. Instead, the NTSB final accident report (https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/accidentreports

If by "called out" you imply criticised, then that is not correct. Instead, the NTSB final accident report (https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/accidentreports/reports/aar1003.pdf https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/accidentreports/reports/..., p. section 2.3.1) praises the specific quick action: "Although the flight crew was only able to complete about one-third of the Engine Dual Failure checklist, immediately after the bird strike, the captain did accomplish one critical item that the flight crew did not reach in the checklist: starting the APU. Starting the APU early in the accident sequence proved to be critical because it improved the outcome of the ditching by ensuring that electrical power was available to the airplane. Further, if the captain had not started the APU, the airplane would not have remained in normal law mode. This critical step would not have been completed if the flight crew had simply followed the order of the items in the checklist. The NTSB concludes that, despite being unable to complete the Engine Dual Failure checklist, the captain started the APU, which improved the outcome of the ditching by ensuring that a primary source of electrical power was available to the airplane and that the airplane remained in normal law and maintained the flight envelope protections, one of which protects against a stall." The final report also gave a new safety recommendation (A-10-66, p. 124) to develop more appropriate (shorter) checklist for dual-engine failure specifically for low-altitude incidents.