Did you see the pictures? I'd say the description is accurate. The ship lacks the brightly-lit, clean, polished interior I would expect to see in a European, Asian, or American nuclear facility. It's kind of dingy looking to be blunt.
Sure, a claustrophobic architecture is not surprising for a ship, but most readers' experience of large boats--if any--is likely to be with cruise ships. Should the author have omitted a physical description of the ship's features because a reasonable reader could have guessed them? Personally, I appreciate these kinds of small details.
The article does flirt with open skepticism of the project, and I'm open to the possibility that this stance is unfair, but I don't think these atmospheric details cross any line when they seem quite apt looking at the accompanying pictures.
Also, I agree with the comment above that says the critical tone is unsurprising for an article on nuclear tech, domestic or foreign.
