Well, the day has finally arrived. Later this afternoon, around COB over at the Interior Department in DC (which, if we know how those folks work, might be as early as 3:30 PM), the agency will officially close down the comment period attached to the Draft Proposed five year offshore energy plan.

This comment period, our readers can attest, has gone on for what seems like 130 years. In reality, though, it’s only been in place a little more than eight months, just enough time for Secretary Salazar to rally his forces in opposition to it, and thus provide himself all the justification he needs to receive these comments with a smile, thank everyone in earnest for sending them in, and then toss ‘em straight into the furnace downstairs.

The foundation for that effort started to be laid last week, when he told a group of reporters that, in “a legal sense,” he wasn’t obliged to lift a finger on this thing for another three years. Later today we’ll hear how many Americans piped up over the past six months to implore the secretary to actually do his job, but this morning we got word for more than one-third of the U.S. Senate that any effort to pocket veto this plan and continue the de facto ban on responsible offshore energy access would not be abided.

The letter, which includes five Democrats and was directed to Sec. Salazar, brings some serious heat. Here are a couple excerpts:

It is more important than ever that the federal government allow for development of domestic offshore energy supplies made available in the [Draft Proposed Plan]. By offering new leasing opportunities, the DPP is appropriately expansive and provides the Department with maximum flexibility to properly utilize our nation’s domestic resources.

Ok – it wasn’t as scorching as we made it out to be. But we’re talking about the U.S. Senate, after all – the cooling <insert appropriate kitchenware here> of democracy.

Complete listing of who signed this bad boy can be found below. If you’re in a spot to thank these group of forward-looking men and women – which includes both of Alaska’s senators, fwiw – please do it.

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (Lead), Byron Dorgan, Lisa Murkowski, Blanche Lincoln, Kit Bond, Richard Burr, Mike Enzi, Jim DeMint, Richard Shelby, Jeff Sessions, John McCain, Saxby Chambliss, Jim Risch, Mike Johanns, Thad Cochran, John Cornyn, Bob Corker, David Vitter, George Voinovich, Sam Brownback, Lamar Alexander, James Inhofe, John Barrasso, John Thune, Roger Wicker, Jim Bunning, Charles Grassley, Orrin Hatch, Pat Roberts, Johnny Isakson, Tom Coburn, Robert Bennett, Mark Begich, Ben Nelson, and Mark Pryor.

Oh, and lest we forget – not to be outdone by their colleagues in the House of Lords, House Democratic energy leaders also got together to send their own fine letter to the secretary, this one a bit more focused on what might happen if Mr. Salazar decides to sit on his hands. To wit:

Without significantly more production, commodity prices can be expected to rise dramatically. The effects of sudden energy price increases are acutely felt by my constituents, many of whom live in poor and rural areas. Offshore exploration can help alleviate these pains by ensuring a more constant fuel supply.

In case you’re having trouble reading the signatories on that one, we’ve gone ahead and done the hard work for you below:

Reps. Dan Boren (LEAD), Mike Ross, Jim Matheson, Solomon Ortiz, Charlie Melancon, Gene Green, Bobby Bright, Jim Costa, Henry Cuellar, Chet Edwards, Jim Marshall, Collin Peterson, John Salazar, John Tanner, Harry Teague, and Tim Walz

When news broke a couple weeks back of the Obama administration’s decision to lend $10 billion of taxpayer money to aid in Brazil’s development of its offshore energy resources, reactions to the announcement were much more restrained than one would’ve expected. Certainly much more than we expected, if our post on the issue at the time is any indication.

Maybe it was that the story was initially reported by Spanish newswire EFE and no one else — and only picked up in the U.S. afterward by an outfit calling itself “Rig Zone.” Maybe it was the fact that the Export-Import Bank was involved in the transaction, and no one actually knows what that office does or why it’s important (although it was able to prepare a snazzy fact sheet in defense of the transaction). Maybe it’s the fact that we’re talking about Brazil – not exactly America’s closest friend in the hemisphere, but not exactly its greatest adversary either.

Whatever the reasons for the delayed reaction, the mainstream press eventually (if grudgingly) picked up on the story. A great editorial was filed in the Wall Street Journal subsequent to a quirky take on the decision offered up by Investor’s Business Daily. Other news outlets took note, but perhaps because we were only talking about a paltry $10 billion, it never really caught fire. Even considering the patent outrageousness of it all.

Thankfully, proof is starting to surface that our representatives on Capitol Hill are finally taking note of the story as well. Earlier today, Louisiana senator David Vitter sent the following letter to President Obama – applauding him for his recent interest in expanding the supply of oil on the world market, but inquiring also (reasonably, in our judgment) why he isn’t as keen on doing the same thing in the United States:

While I appreciate your efforts to expand offshore energy production in Brazil, it is my hope that your Administration will move forward quickly with a commonsense 5-year plan that opens our OCS, including the Eastern Gulf region, the Southeast region, and Alaska’s oceans.

Look at that – even tossing in a brief mention at the end of the struggle we’re having up in Alaska on this very same question. Actually, though, it’s not exactly the same. Alaska was included in previous five-year plans, and even still, areas in the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas that scientists say hold more than 25 billion barrels of oil continue to lie in wait. Some of these areas, keep in mind, have already been bid on, leased, and paid for. But none of them have been explored – a distinction, albeit for different reasons, that we share with our friends along the Atlantic seaboard.

At any rate, Sen. Vitter seems to be onto something here – and best we can tell, he seems to be the only one on Capitol Hill currently onto it. His office number in Washington is (202) 224-4623. Maybe it’s worth giving him a quick shout and letting him know to keep asking the important questions. And maybe see if his colleagues might want to join him at some point.