The United States will hand back thousands of acres of land and close many installations under the accord, called the Land Partnership Plan (LPP).

It runs through 2011.

It calls for no cuts in U.S. troop strength in South Korea, which stands at 37,000.

The National Assembly’s ratification vote clears the way for far-reaching changes for the U.S. military presence in South Korea and for the Asian country’s economic development.

In March, representatives of South Korea’s Ministry of National Defense and U.S. Forces Korea signed the LPP agreement. But the legislature’s ratification gives the LPP the legal status of an international agreement.

“It was not final until ratified,” said Robert T. Mounts, special assistant for international relations, United States SOFA secretary, in Seoul.

“It allows us to begin implementing the agreement and provides a broad basis of political and legal support for the agreement,” Mounts said.

“It will take 10 years of fairly intense project management to ensure that it’s implemented according to its terms,” he said.

Said Army Col. Daniel Wilson, USFK’s chief engineer: “As I like to tell everybody, what’s next is the hard part; the easy part is past us.”

Both sides will have to work out an updated timetable and procedures for carrying out the plan, said Wilson.

“Then, internally, we’ve got a lot of master planning efforts going on that will translate this agreement, this plan, into a concrete action plan on the ground,” he said.

The plan calls for the number of major U.S. installations to drop from 41 to 23. To accomplish this, the military will close or partially close some sites, while enlarging or creating other installations. The United States has 95 sites in South Korea.

About 32,000 acres of land valued at $1.3 billion will return to South Korea, reducing the U.S. military’s “footprint” on the peninsula by more than 50 percent.

South Korea, in turn, is to give the U.S. military about 1,270 acres to create additional room for the troops and equipment that would move to the remaining installations.

No site will be closed or land returned until new land and facilities are ready for occupancy by U.S. forces.

The United States expects to invest $1.1 billion over the life of the plan to improve living and working conditions on its remaining installations.

“LPP will greatly benefit the ROK economy because there is a significant amount of land being returned that can potentially be used for commercial development,” USFK said in a written statement that quoted Army Gen. Leon J. LaPorte, commander of U.S. forces in South Korea.

It’s also expected to yield economic gains and job opportunities through construction in areas USFK will return to South Korea, and on installations where U.S. forces will move under consolidation, the statement said.

“The consolidation of our installations will also result in less congestion, pollution and traffic in many communities throughout Korea,” LaPorte was quoted as saying, “and should also reduce the chances of military vehicles being involved in traffic accidents.”

The plan also opens the way for what the U.S. military says will be improved training, and more-effective command and control of U.S. forces.

The LPP permits joint U.S. use of 36 South Korean training ranges, many of which it already uses. And it frees the United States to set up safety zones around parts of installations where explosives or other military activities might pose hazards.

“We think the agreement is very much valuable to us in several respects,” said Kim Chang-boem of the Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

Some installations are in the heart of urban centers. Some in the South Korean public have come to view those sites as a barrier to further urban development.

Those include Camp Hialeah in Pusan, a part of Camp Walker in Taegu, Camp Page in Chunchon and Camp Market in Incheon, Kim said.

Given the cities’ rapid growth, Kim said, they’ve come to view the bases as impeding the “urban redevelopment which the local communities anxiously looked forward to.”

Relocating or closing those in-city bases would help ease those cities’ long-standing complaints about the U.S. military, Kim said.

“And,” he added, it also hopefully would “help lessen the potential tension between the neighboring community and the USFK bases.”