It's an interesting idea, but I do wonder what the US needs a super-sized icebreaker for. Unlike Russia or even Canada to some extend it's not as if a third of your major ports are shut down by ice for the majority of the year and you don't have several offshore installations in the arctic sea to take care of.

Indeed, Russian or Canadian this large IB would made more sense.

USA do not have direct access to Arctic sea.

Moreover there is a long-standing friction with Canada (during the Manhattan transit the USCG icebreaker was faced by Canadian IB...)
So I think that such design cannot be extended to US (and even to Canada).

Since taking the helm of the Coast Guard a year and a half ago, Commandant Adm. Paul Zukunft has traveled the country — and the world — stumping for another heavy icebreaker to back up the 40-year-old Polar Star.

The first step in that process began Wednesday, he announced, with a Federal Business Opportunities solicitation for the Polar Class Icebreaker Replacement Program, which went live just before noon.

"We have President Obama, in Alaska, saying we need to accelerate the build-out of icebreakers," he said at the annual Surface Navy Association Symposium outside Washington, D.C. "I’m pretty sure I heard an 's' at the end of that."

...

"We have no shore infrastructure, so that is a floating command platform," he said. It should also be able to do environmental response, safety at sea and unmanned vehicle operations in the air and underwater.

Specifically, the new ships need to be able to continuously push through up to six feet of ice — but preferably eight — going at least 3 knots.

In ice-free waters, it will need a sustained speed of 15 knots, or the speed at max horsepower.

The new icebreakers must also be able to:

• Sail a range of 21,500 nautical miles at 12 knots.
• Go 80 days underway without replenishment.
• Run at least 3,300 operational hours a year.
• Visually evaluate ice conditions for 12 nautical miles in each direction.
• Land a range of military and federal helicopters.
• Hangar two Coast Guard helicopters or future unmanned systems.

A full list of requirements is available on the FBO web site.

The Coast Guard’s sole remaining vessel, the Polar Star, is slated for retirement as early as 2019. Every other nation touching the Arctic Circle maintains a robust fleet. Russia, for example, is adding a dozen icebreakers to what already is the world’s biggest fleet. This sorry state of affairs led Alaska Republican Senator Dan Sullivan to say, “The highways of the Arctic are paved by icebreakers. Right now, the Russians have superhighways, and we have dirt roads with potholes.”

These vessels will be of increasing importance as vanishing sea ice opens shipping lanes between Asia and Europe that are 40 percent faster than conventional routes. The region also is home to vast fisheries, mineral deposits, and energy reserves estimated at $30 trillion. President Obama called the changes of the far north “the birth of a new ocean.”

...

“The growth of human activity in the Arctic region will require highly engaged stewardship to maintain the open seas necessary for global commerce and scientific research, allow for search and rescue activities, and provide for regional peace and stability,” the White House said in a statement. “Heavy icebreakers will ensure that the United States can meet our national interests, protect and manage our natural resources, and strengthen our international … relationships.”

For the sort of operations that the USCG must conduct, I'd wonder if more of a double-acting hull might be appropriate. Higher transit speed, better operation in open water, somewhat lower overall ice capacity (as best I can tell) but more than enough for what we generally need to handle. However, I am not aware of a double-acting configuration that uses multiple azipods, which I'd say is probably mandatory for a naval vessel (and definitely for a nuclear one).