No, just pointing out that sometimes the AIM default procedure isn't necessarily compatible with the evaluated holding airspace. Not much could go wrong here over water, but might be a consideration elsewhere.
As to your reference to being able to hold at MEA at all fixes, I believe that paragraph has been rescinded in the current version of 8260.19. It's no longer the case:
Order 8260.19H
2-10-3. Unplanned holding at designated reporting points. a. Where required for aircraft separation, ATO may request aircraft to hold at any designated reporting point in a standard holding pattern at the MEA or MRA, whichever altitude is the higher, at locations where a minimum holding altitude has not been requested. For this reason, the conditions to be considered for holding (obstacle clearance, communications, and facility performance) must be reviewed whenever reporting points are established or revised, even though specific holding authorization has not been requested by the ATC facility. b. Unplanned holding at en route fixes may be expected on airway or route radials, bearings, or courses. If the fix is a facility, unplanned holding could be on any radial or bearing. Where standard holding cannot be accomplished at the MEA or MRA, any necessary limitations must be clearly indicated on Form 8260-2.
Order 8260.19L
1-1-5. Explanation of Changes. ...
(8) Paragraph 2-10-3. Replaced requirement to always evaluate for unplanned holding at all designated reporting points with a requirement to only evaluate holding at compulsory reporting points when specifically requested by ATC.
