CONQUEST AIR Inc. 

5820· Miami Lakes Drive East 

Miami Lakes, Florida 33014 

Telephone: 305-863-3108 

Cell: 305-218-0619 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Federal Aviation Administration 

June 7, 2016 

Docket management System, Room PL 40 1 

Ms. Nia Daniels 

Ref: Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2016-4554 

Dear Ms.. Daniels-, 

Fax: 305-871-1622 

Petition for Reconsideration of Denial: Exemption No. FAA-2016-4554 

Maximum Payload Provision of CFR Part 110.2 

Justification for Reconsideration 

Currently the FAA, EPA and ICAO are in the final phase of requiring air carriers to 

present a plan to Reduce Carbon C02 Gas Emissions. Additional documents have been 

published which will further support our request. Conquest Air feels the FAA in its 

decision making failed to address the Federal Governments new policy on Reducing 

Carbon C02 Emissions. 

In the denial letter, the FAA failed to address any of the Carbon C02 Gas Emission 

requirements which are becoming mandatory and clearly defme ways in which air 

carriers can reduce their Carbon C02 Emissions which includes an increase in payloads. 

Conquest Air feels the FAA failed to acknowledge the fact that the 125 1 135 ARC did in 

fact address piston powered aircraft with payloads greater than 7,500 lbs. to be allowed to 

operate under Part 135 as well as turbo powered aircraft manufactured under Part 25. The 

FAA approved Ameriflights reconsideration for their exemption based on the 125 I 135 

ARC applicability 32 documents. 

Conquest Air feels the FAA should not discriminate under any circumstance against any 

operator wishing to comply with the Reduced Carbon C02 Gas Emissions regulations or 

with the 125 I 135 ARC recommendations. Any operator wishing to meet the above 

mention requirements should be permitted to do so without prejudice. 
The FAA has been concerned about all the other operators wishing to operate aircraft 

with greater than 7,500 lbs. payload under Part 135, but the fact is that in over 10 years 

there have only been five (5) operators who have requested such exemption and only one 

exemption has been granted ( Ameriflight, IFL, Skywagon, Florida Air Transport and 

Conquest Air) have been the only operators seeking similar exemptions. 

The restriction imposed on the Part 125 operators was an economic restriction set by the 

DOT and Applicability 32 allowed for a compromise between the federal government 

and the 125 operators to come into compliance. The failure off the FAA's willingness to 

work with these cargo operators or the Aviation Rule Making Committees 

recommendations has caused almost all of them to close down their businesses. 

Attached to this letter are additional documents pertinent to our exemption request. 

1. Transportation's Role in Reducing U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. 

2. FAA Study supporting increasing the Payload for Part 135 Air Carriers. 

3. Aviation & Climate Change: Aircraft Emissions 

4. Impacts of Aviation on Climate change 

5. Aviation & Emissions 

6. FAA Center of Excellence (https://ASCENT.AERO) 

I am available to meet with you at any time to answer any questions you may have. 

Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. 

Carlos Gomez 

Cell: 305-218-0619