The key word in the rfp is "affordable." If the NPS looks at the fees and assumes that they should be kept at that level, no matter who is responsible for the renovation both courses will revert to their traditional poor conditions. I don't see how courses that are on difficult sites (flooding at EP, trees and serious elevation at RC) can maintain good conditions with green fees set at $20-35.
There's no mention of Langston in the proposal although I think it would be a better candidate than EP. It's a better site and much less threatened with flooding. I lived in DC for many years and flooding of parts of EP was fairly frequent event. Drying out took weeks.
EPP is one of my three “home” courses in the DC area and the one closest to my office. I’ve played it several hundred times since 2001.
The affordability question for EPP could be solved by a local rate of some kind. The walking green fee is $31/35 with a $15 cart fee. There is currently no form of annual membership, so you might be able to establish a local membership to solve the affordability issue.
EPP sits on a site with a whole lot of potential. You only need to look the historic pictures to see that. I think the flooding issues are manageable so long as you can move some earth. The site was 5-7 feet higher 100 years ago and has gradually sunken as the river fill it is built on has settled.
The Rock Creek site would also be very good if you could remove a whole bunch of trees. That will be the key issue. There are couple of good holes still there that could be built upon.