4BB is a fairly standard raise from UTG at FR. If you are sometimes raising a smaller size from the same position with a weaker hand, that's a tell.
SB looks tight/nittish. Before you gave the stats I would have assumed his 3bet vs EP was less than that. Either this is a sample size issue or he is insufficiently adjusting for position (which is likely enough at NL2). A 3% 3bet range should be something like {TT+, AK}. In fact, there's a good chance it's exactly that range. It doesn't include AQ. Therefore AQ isn't in villain's range OTT.
A villain like that will probably only continue with KK+ if you 4bet pre-flop. Card elimination means there are only 6 combos in that range, vs 27 folding combos. I don't have equilab here so I can't do a proper EV calculation, but 4bet should be quite a bit +EV. As has been noted, if you're going to take this line on a dry A-high flop, it's difficult to see how calling can be profitable and 4betting may be better for you. I do not think you can fold this hand pre-flop.
If you do call pre-flop, you do so on the assumption that you will be ahead on any A-high or K-high flop, and you will want to get the chips in. Conversely, you will certainly be behind on any other flop and you can give up the hand relatively cheaply (or, since you're IP, you may be able to take a free card and hope). Because villain is likely to read your hand, it's not really a situation in which you can often bluff profitably. It also has to be said that calling pre-flop only makes sense if you believe that villain can pay you with a worse hand when you hit TPTK.
You can assume that villain will cbet his entire range on that flop, with cbet 71%. At this point you're ahead against 21 combos, tied with 6 combos and beaten by 1 combo. The problem is that villain won't call a raise with second pair (and there are no worse TPs in his range), so you don't get value by raising. So you call. But how do you get value from calling? Only because you hope to induce villain to bet again with a worse hand. If you're convinced he won't do so, you may as well raise and take the pot rather than give him a chance to suck you out.
So the logic of having called the flop implies you have to call OTT.
The cbet turn stat (to answer Castle93) shows how often the villain, having been PFA and having cbet (and been called) OTF makes a further cbet OTT. If he checks the flop, the stat to look at would be "delayed cbet". So we are looking at the right stat here. Because villain is not very aggressive pre-flop, I suspect there will be a sample size issue with the cbet turn oop stat. In fact, there obviously is, because the true value can't be 0. If we really thought this stat was 0 (or close to 0), we shouldn't have called OTF, because we can't get any more money by doing that.
Even if villain's range is {AA,AK} OTT, that's 1 combo which beats us and 6 combos which draw. That gives us 3/7 of the pot, so EV of calling is still +17BB. Likewise, we will also have to call OTR if villain bets again. In some sense, by calling the 3bet pre-flop, we're already committed to calling the villain down on a board like this.
