CFII question for Approach Gurus

I had a surprise reaction from approach controller while entering the
GPS 23 at UCP:
http://www.naco.faa.gov/d-tpp/0709/05842R23.PDF
I was doing a final pre-checkride lesson, and about 25 NW of UCP. In
IMC, assigned heading 250 at 4000. I expected the next word would be
"advise when you have the New Castle weather" and then "what approach
would you like?" But instead we got proceed direct Zarto, cleared GPS 23
approach. OK, so student stayed at 4000, entered the procedure in the
530W and headed to Zarto, no problem.

Side note: Notice the two other IAFs at Mercy and Volan. Mercy is on
North/South airway, and Volan on East/West. (First question: do we all
agree that the note that approach is NA from Volan WESTBOUND makes no
sense, it should be EASTBOUND? Similar to NA from Mercy northbound.)

Anyway I thought the student might get to Zarto still at 4000 realize
there was time to descend to 2600 before Wobut and just turn inbound the
few degrees required. The 530 asks "do you want to hold at Zarto" and I
saw him pause and think about it and he selected "yes", which seemed
like a good answer (the only really correct answer I thought).

So as we turned outbound for the hold the controller comes on rather
gruffly and says "1234X, where are you going?" I got on and said
"...entering the hold as published " and he says "why, that is not
authorized, if you want to do it you have to ask.." I pointed out that
the only NoPT enteries were from the airways, and anyway we needed to
loose altitude in the hold.

So controller says "...that is incorrect. All entries in the arc from
Volan to Mercy are NoPT!! So where does that come from? Do controllers
have a different plate that we use? Also you would think the typo about
Volan would have been discovered and corrected. I have pointed out this
to NACO, controllers, etc. but it stays in the book. I am sure there
have been numerous arrivals at Volan westbound cleared for the approach,
which is common sense but violates the plate.

So can anyone help to clairfy my understanding and/or straighten out the
published word? Would you have entered the hold?

By the way I queried the student later about why he did the hold and he
said he didn't want to intercept the glide slope (LNAV+V...will be LPV
soon) from above in a descent. He thought there might be a "false lobe"
or phantom glideslope above as in ILS. We talked about that, so all in
all it was a good learning experience for him.