By Andrea Shalal

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Pentagon is restructuring a $3.48 billion contract with Boeing Co for management of the troubled U.S. homeland missile defense program, said two sources familiar with the situation.

The system, which faces a critical test on Sunday, has failed to hit a dummy missile in five of eight tests since the Bush administration rushed to deploy the system in 2004 to counter growing threats by North Korea. It has not hit a target since 2008.

Another miss could put the brakes on plans by the U.S. Missile Defense Agency (MDA) to spend billions of dollars to improve the Boeing-led Ground-based Midcourse Defense system (GMD), and add 14 more interceptors to the 30 already in the ground in Alaska and California.

U.S. defense officials, lawmakers and outside experts agree the GMD program - projected to cost $41 billion - must be changed, even if Sunday's test succeeds.

Under discussion is additional funding for maintaining interceptors and improving their reliability, more testing of components and the entire system, and upgrades to improve the system's ability to tell actual missiles from decoys. There will also be different fee structures to provide Boeing with incentives for improvements in quality rather than cost-cutting.

Officials at Boeing, the Pentagon and MDA declined comment on the contractual changes under discussion.

The program, long a political football for U.S. lawmakers, remains the only U.S. defense against long-range missiles that could carry chemical, biological or nuclear warheads.

Supporters say the system is making progress under Navy Vice Admiral James Syring, who took over in November 2012 from Army Lieutenant General Patrick O'Reilly.

But the multiple test failures and a harsh review by an independent group commissioned last year by MDA have spurred a drive to restructure a seven-year Boeing contract that began in 2011, and the initial contract it has held since 2001, according to sources briefed on the review. The aim is beef up the system's quality and reliability.

That review has not been released, even to Congress, and details are being closely held.

'A LOT OF BAD ENGINEEERING'

Led by former military officials, the review blasted MDA's move away from a rigorous "systems engineering" approach and more frequent testing that would have boosted reliability and quality, and could have helped avert last July's test failure, according to the sources familiar with the situation.

Pentagon acquisition chief Frank Kendall in February said "a lot of bad engineering" was found while investigating the July test failure and two previous ones in 2010.