I don't know about names (I think only noticed the name Holden, but then again I don't know where that's supposed to be, so I couldn't know if I could have any reason to object), but there does appear to be an issue with your opener suggesting that the two moons have their new phases together once every century, seeing as that would require at least one of the two moons' cycles to last 10 years or more. The period of the double leap tide would have to be the least common multiple of the two moon cycles and honestly I think keeping those under a year's time would be the wiser choice. Having a moon cycles in the tens of years is already too much, so if we're going to reject that anyway, might as well keep it in sane numbers.
For one thing, we already know that one of the two moon cycles would have to be about 30 days, so that months exist, meaning that would pump the other moon's cycle up to 33.3 years if we wanted to keep the century thing. I'll be real with ya mate. It doesn't seem plausible.
Otherwise, interesting beginning. I like the concept so far, though we've not really gotten much, looking forward to see to how this turns out.