Narrative:

We previously returned to the field due to an left bleed duct warning. On this flight first officer had a normal takeoff. At about 9;500-10;000 ft we received an right bleed duct warning message on EICAS. We canceled and identified the message. The first officer maintained the flight controls with the autopilot on and took the radios. I referenced the QRH for right bleed duct warning. The first thing I saw in the QRH under right bleed duct was that after 30 seconds the aircraft would unpressurized and I completed the QRH procedure. The aircraft was climbing through 10;000 ft and I advised the first officer to request a level off or descent. We requested a descent to the lowest safe altitude. Our initial clearance was for 9;000 ft. The cabin altitude continued to increase and was uncontrollable in auto or manual modes. We advised the controller we were troubleshooting a pressurization issue and to standby. The warning message became a caution message. I made the decision to return to the field for the second time due to the abnormality of the situation with the opposite side system being affected; our pressurization issue; and taking into account the fuel required to get to destination at a lower altitude. The flight attendant's indicated passengers were very uncomfortable with the pressurization. We landed and returned to the gate without further incident. I contacted our dispatcher to determine our course of action. Several hours later a decision to cancel the flight was made and a ferry permit was issued to fly unpressurized with bleeds and pack valves closed. We flew unpressurized without further incident. This was a maintenance issue. Upon returning to the field the first time; the mechanic; first officer; and I completed an engine run-up. The aircraft passed the ops check and was signed off by maintenance.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: After returning to the field for an L Bleed Duct Warning; CRJ900 flight crew experiences an R Bleed Duct Warning message on EICAS and elects to again return to the field for maintenance.

Narrative: We previously returned to the field due to an L Bleed Duct Warning. On this flight First Officer had a normal takeoff. At about 9;500-10;000 FT we received an R Bleed Duct Warning message on EICAS. We canceled and identified the message. The First Officer maintained the flight controls with the autopilot on and took the radios. I referenced the QRH for R Bleed Duct Warning. The first thing I saw in the QRH under R Bleed Duct was that after 30 seconds the aircraft would unpressurized and I completed the QRH procedure. The aircraft was climbing through 10;000 FT and I advised the First Officer to request a level off or descent. We requested a descent to the lowest safe altitude. Our initial clearance was for 9;000 FT. The cabin altitude continued to increase and was uncontrollable in auto or manual modes. We advised the Controller we were troubleshooting a pressurization issue and to standby. The warning message became a caution message. I made the decision to return to the field for the second time due to the abnormality of the situation with the opposite side system being affected; our pressurization issue; and taking into account the fuel required to get to destination at a lower altitude. The flight attendant's indicated passengers were very uncomfortable with the pressurization. We landed and returned to the gate without further incident. I contacted our Dispatcher to determine our course of action. Several hours later a decision to cancel the flight was made and a ferry permit was issued to fly unpressurized with bleeds and pack valves closed. We flew unpressurized without further incident. This was a maintenance issue. Upon returning to the field the first time; the Mechanic; First Officer; and I completed an engine run-up. The aircraft passed the ops check and was signed off by Maintenance.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.