43 was well within its authority -- far from abusing its powers -- when it entertained this Petition and launched a national public inquiry. D.4. Section 362(a) of the United States Bankruptcy Code does not support respondent Peabody’s request for the dismissal of the national public inquiry. 2.105. Respondent Peabody filed bankruptcy petitions for the majority of its entities in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Missouri.166 In its response to the Petition in this proceeding, the company claimed it is “precluded under the United States Bankruptcy Code from responding to the Honorable Commission’s Order and the Petition, and from participating in the present proceeding.”167 It essentially claims that Section 362(a) of the United States Bankruptcy Code operates as a stay on the Honorable Commission’s proceedings.168 2.106. Section 362(a) of the United States Bankruptcy Code is not applicable to the present proceeding and does not preclude respondent Peabody from responding to Honorable Commission’s Order, answering the Petition, and fully participating in the investigation. First, the automatic stay does not apply because the petitioners have not commenced or continued “a judicial, administrative, or other action or proceeding against the debtor,” or sought to “recover a claim against the debtor.”169 Second, the automatic stay is inapplicable because the investigation is fact-finding and non-adversarial in nature and does not seek to adjudicate any issue of property rights that might otherwise be within the purview of the Bankruptcy Court.170 2.107. In any event, in July 2016, a United States Bankruptcy Judge allowed citizen groups to continue with complaints to a regulatory body concerning respondent Peabody’s obligation to fully perform mine reclamation and environmental clean-ups during the bankruptcy proceedings.171 Similar to the citizen groups, the petitioners filed a Petition to the Honorable Commission, which has led to this fact-finding 166 Peabody Energy, Peabody Energy Chapter 11 Protection Information, 13 April 2016, available at http://www.peabodyenergy.com/content/2625/chapter-11-protection, last accessed on 06 February 2017. 167 Peabody Energy Corporation, Special Appearance and Motion to Dismiss dated 15 September 2016, para 6. 168 supra., note 167. 169 11 U.S.C. § 362(a)(1). 170 11 U.S.C. § 362(a)(2)-(8); See also United States’ Response to Citizen Groups’ Motion to Lift Automatic Stay to the Extent it Applies, In re: Peabody Energy Corporation, et al., Chapter 11 Case No. 1642529-399, para. 15, available at http://www.kccllc.net/peabody/document/1642529160608000000000029, last accessed on 08 February 2017; [“The threshold question under Section 362(a)(3) is whether the act involves the property of the estate. See In re National Cattle Congress, Inc., 179 B.R. 588, 592 (Bankr. N.D. Iowa 1995)”]. 171 Environmental Law & Policy Center and Western Organization of Resource Councils v. Peabody Energy Corporation et al.; Order Granting Motion of the Environmental Law & Policy Center and the Western Organization of Resource Councils for Relief from the Automatic Stay, 20 July 2016, Chapter 11, Case No. 16-42529-399.