C(14,7,3) = 14
C(30,15,4) = 30
In fact Stanislaw Radziszowski has since shown that C(14,7,3) = 15, so that entry was definitely wrong. Furthermore, other table entries were derived from the two above. Here is the current status of all entries whose upper bound in the paper is unsubstantiated (these bounds are all 1 more than those given in the paper):
C(14,7,3) = 15
C(28,14,3) <= 15
C(29,15,4) <= 31
C(30,15,4) <= 31
C(23,16,5) <= 20
Finally, the publisher mistakenly added two optimality stars to the page proofs: Neither the (11,7,6) covering of size 84 nor the (14,5,3) covering of size 47 was known to be optimal; the latter covering has actually been improved upon, although the former was recently shown to be optimal by Applegate, Rains and Sloane.