1 Source needs more integration time, because of a suggestive feature in the 1 bandpass. 2 Source needs more integration time, based on L_OH_^pred^) list an HI redshift and spectrum 3 with z=0.04714, which is not unambiguous but casts doubt on the PSCz 3 redshift of this source. 4 Galactic HI in bandpass. 5 Possible OH absorption feature, but<~1mJy deep. 6 Radio-quiet IR QSO (Beichman et al., 1986ApJ...308L...1B) 7 Observations were performed during daylight, which increases the rms noise 7 significantly. 8 Possible 23mJy OH emission feature 220km/s redward of the optical redshift. 11 1667MHz OH line undetectable because of Galactic HI. 12 OH undetectable because of RFI. 13 Continuum creates standing waves, making OH undetectable. 14 3C 048. 15 3C 273 16 Continuum source (444mJy; Condon et al., 1998, Cat. ) 82" from this 16 target creates standing waves, making OH undetectable. 17 4C 12.50. 18 3C 459. 21 Listed as an OHM by Baan et al. (1998ApJ...509..633B), but no OH measurements 21 exist in the literature. 22 No spectrum of this OHM is available in the literature 23 OH kilomaser 24 Baan et al. (1998ApJ...509..633B) measure z=0.0097 for this object, which 24 differs by 3900km/s from the OH detection at z=0.0023 (Henkel & Wilson, 24 1990A&A...229..431H). Since the peak OH line is only 3mJy, the validity of 24 this OH detection is suspect. 25 Bottinelli et al. (1990IAUC.4977Q....B) quote a distance of 375Mpc in their 25 detection announcement, but the luminosity distance derived from Grogin & 25 Geller (2000, Cat. ) is a factor of 4 less, at 94Mpc. 25 Hence, this detection is probably spurious 26 Baan et al. (1992AJ....103..728B) report upper limits on L_OH_ for this OHM 26 that are significantly below published values, making the validity of this 26 OHM suspect.