Doubtless.
High confidence on classification and association. 
High confidence on classification and association. The SED is not discriminating.
High confidence on classification and association. 
Doubtless.
High confidence on classification, medium confidence on association. #11269 is the most likely, but #11270 should also be considered. Either would be low-z by the EW classification. #11270 is slightly further away, so mildly disfavored.
Doubtless.
Doubtless.
Doubtless.
Junk. High continuum and noise with a low EW contaminated this false source. Nearby XMM source.
High confidence on classification and association.
Doubless. This is [OII]. Cross-list with 13 as Hbeta and 19 as [OIII]5007.
Doubless. This is Hbeta. Cross-list with 12 as [OII] and 19 as [OIII]5007.
Doubtless.
High confidence on classification and association.
High confidence on classification, medium on association. #12757 is the better counterpart with #12756 as the second best, but either would be a low-z object.
#14451 is a little fearful since it's hard to see how it contributes flux to the red fiber. However, I have no other counterpart options so I'll take it. There's a hint of a z-band detection at a more centered position, but it doesn't get picked up in the photometric catalog.
Doubless. This is [OIII]5007. Cross-list with 12 as [OII] and 13 as Hbeta. An possible XMM source.
This one is mysterious. The bright galaxy to the left is a known low-z object by NED/SDSS, and we pick up it's elliptical-like spectrum too. This is close to [NeIII]3869, but it's probably a coincidence. There's a very weak continuum object behind there at ~23 mag which I speculate is the real [OII] companion to this line, but it didn't make our sextractor catalog.
Junk. Cosmic ray sneaking in.
High confidence on classification, low confidence on association. #11649 may be the counterpart or there may be no imaging counterpart.
Doubtless.
Doubtless. An XMM source.
Doubtless.
Doubtless.
Doubtless.
Doubtless.
I speculate that #14396 and #14395 are either being wrongly split up by the photometry or that #14395 is the correct counterpart.
There appears to be no viable counterpart.
Doubtless.
High confidence on classification and association.
This counterpart's a little far from our usual comfort zone, but we appear to detect weak continuum ourselves and it is the only viable counterpart. There's a chance that instead this is an LAE with no counterpart, but the more likely truth is that #9423 is the counterpart.
Junk. This is just a low EW continuum feature left over from a bright low-z galaxy spectrum.
Doubtless. This is [OII], to be cross listed with 37 as [OIII]5007.
Doubtless. This is [OIII]5007, to be cross listed with 34 as [OII].
Doubtless if going by the EW cut, which is all we have here. This could be a low EW LBG, but we have no way no knowing without further imaging bands.
Doubtless.
Junk. A cosmic ray snuck through.
This is [OII] to be cross-listed with 42 as [OIII]5007, 43 as [NeIII]3869, 49 as Hbeta, 50 as [OIII]4959, and 59 as [NeV]3426. An XMM source.
Junk. Low EW feature from continuum structure.
Junk. Low EW feature from continuum structure.
This is [OIII]5007 to be cross-listed with 39 as [OII], 43 as [NeIII]3869, 49 as Hbeta, 50 as [OIII]4959, and 59 as [NeV]3426. 
This is [NeIII]3869 to be cross-listed with 39 as [OII], 42 as [OIII]5007, 49 as Hbeta, 50 as [OIII]4959, and 59 as [NeV]3426. 
Junk. Low EW feature from continuum structure.
Junk. Low EW feature from continuum structure.
Junk. Low EW feature from continuum structure.
Junk. Low EW feature from continuum structure.
Junk. Low EW feature from continuum structure.
This is Hbeta to be cross-listed with 39 as [OII], 43 as [NeIII]3869, 42 as [OIII]5007, 50 as [OIII]4959, and 59 as [NeV]3426. 
This is [OIII]4959 to be cross-listed with 39 as [OII], 42 as [OIII]5007, 43 as [NeIII]3869, 49 as Hbeta, and 59 as [NeV]3426. 
Junk. This is cross talk noise from a nearby star.
Junk. This is some cross talk noise from a nearby star, and also just some low EW continuum feature.
Doubtless.
Junk. Low EW feature from continuum structure.
High confidence. The counterpart is a little more displaced than we usually find, but it's the only viable option. There's a small chance that there is no counterpart and this is then an LAE.
High confidence. Buried near the noise of a bright star, there appears to be a background low-z galaxy that we pick up in the imaging. 
Junk. This is a low EW continuum feature of a very bright star.
Junk. This is cross talk noise from a nearby star.
This is [NeV]3426 from a very bright AGN/starburst. To be cross-listed with 39 as [OII], 42 as [OIII]5007, 43 as [NeIII]3869, 49 as Hbeta, and 50 as [OIII]4959. 
Junk. Low EW feature from continuum structure.
Junk. This is cross talk noise from a nearby star.
Junk. This is a low EW continuum feature of a very bright star.
Junk. Low EW feature from continuum structure.
Junk. Low EW feature from continuum structure.
Junk. Low EW feature from continuum structure.
Junk. This is a low EW continuum feature of a very bright star.
Doubtless.
Doubtless.
High confidence on classification. Medium confidence on association.
Medium confidence on classification and association. The only viable counterpart, #8492, is quite far off. 
High confidence on classification and medium on association. The only viable counterpart, #9557, is quite far off. 
Doubtless. There's a NED SDSS spectral match.
Doubtless. Lots of cross listings. This is [OII]. 80 is Hbeta, 81 is [OIII]4959, and 87 is [OIII]5007. 
Doubtless.
Doubtless.
Doubtless.
High confidence on the classification, low confidence on the association. #11720 or #11721 may either be the counterpart, and either would pass the EW cut at an LAE.
Doubtless.
Doubtless.
Doubtless.
Doubtless.
Doubtless.
High confidence. Close (4.8") to an XMM source.
Doubtless.
Doubtless. This is [OIII]5007, 73 is [OII] and 74 is [OIII]4959.
Doubtless. This is [OII], and there are cross-listings. 74 is [OIII]4959 and 75 is [OIII]5007.
Doubtless. This is [OIII]4959, 73 is [OII], and 75 is [OIII]5007.
High confidence.
Doubtless. Lots of cross listings. This is Hbeta. 60 is [OII], 81 is [OIII]4959, and 87 is [OIII]5007. 
Doubtless. Lots of cross listings. This is [OIII]4959. 60 is [OII], 80 is Hbeta, and 87 is [OIII]5007. 
Doubtless.
High confidence on association and classification. The less likely option is #10815 which would be an LAE by the EW cut.
Doubtless.
Wonderful object. So broad, it's probably an AGN but there are no NED counterparts. Doubtless on the classification, medium confidence on the counterpart. #11315 is best, but #11335, #11190, and #11189 have a chance. Also, no XMM counterpart.
Doubtless.
High confidence. There's only one viable counterpart. Although it's a little further out than usual, I take it as the counterpart. The less likely case is that we have no imaging counterpart, and then this would be an LAE. 
Doubtless.
Junk. This is a low EW continuum feature.
Doubtless.
There's a large spatial error, but we detect continuum so this isn't really uncertain. 
Doubtless. The brightest galaxy here has it's own detections, and this is slightly offset in wavelength. There is another fiber not in the detection aperture indicating the clump below the aperture, #13221, is the real counterpart and looks like an HII region in the disk of #13222. This is [OII] and should be cross-listed with 93 as Hbeta. [OIII]5007 gets too close to 5577 to be detected.
Doubtless. This is Hbeta to be cross-listed with 91 as [OII].
Junk. This is a low EW continuum feature.
Junk. This is a low EW continuum feature.
Junk. This is a low EW continuum feature.
Doubtless. This is [OII] to be cross-listed with 98 which is [OIII]5007, 100 which is Hbeta, and 106 which is [OIII]4959.
Doubtless. This is [OIII]5007 to be cross-listed with 99 which is [OII], 100 which is Hbeta, and 106 which is [OIII]4959.
Doubtless. This is Hbeta to be cross-listed with 98 which is [OIII]5007, 99 which is [OII], and 106 which is [OIII]4959.
Doubtless.
High confidence.
This one is uncertain. First off, the detection has poor depth because a cosmic ray took one frame out. Then, it appears there may be an imaging detection that's not quite picked up in our catalog toward the fiber's center in z, but it could be noise. If this is the counterpart or there is no counterpart, this would be an LAE. If we formally go with #15936 as the counterpart, we barely miss the EW cut and would call this low-z, although this would then be an extrememly dim [OII] emitter. We use that last scenario for lack of better information.
Doubtless. This is [OII] to be cross-listed with 107 as [OIII]5007.
Doubtless.
Doubtless. This is [OIII]4959 to be cross-listed with 98 which is [OIII]5007, 99 which is [OII], and 100 which is Hbeta.
Doubtless. This is [OIII]5007 to be cross-listed with 104 as [OII].
Doubtless.
High confidence.
Doubtless. This is [OII] to be cross-listed with 111 which is Hbeta, 112 which is [OIII]4959, and 113 which is [OIII]5007.
Doubtless. This is Hbeta to be cross-listed with 110 which is [OII], 112 which is [OIII]4959, and 113 which is [OIII]5007.
Doubtless. This is [OIII]4959 to be cross-listed with 110 which is [OII], 111 which is Hbeta, and 113 which is [OIII]5007.
Doubtless. This is [OIII]5007 to be cross-listed with 110 which is [OII], 111 which is Hbeta, and 112 which is [OIII]4959.
Junk. The line looks dominated by one hot pixel.
This line looks very bad, and there's no counterpart. The line is too broad and perhaps fake. However, I keep it as a possible LAE lacking strict reason to exclude it.
High confidence.
Doubtless.
Doubtless.
Doubtless.
This one's difficult, but I'm calling it junk. The cross-dispersion profile looks horrible. I suspect we have flat field error here.
Junk. A cosmic ray snuck through.
Junk. A cosmic ray snuck through.
The obvious counterpart option, #15035, is probably not the object since it has a different NED redshift. This is probably just a junk, low EW continuum feature.