/C O R R E C T I O N -- The Association of BellTel Retirees Inc./

In the news release, Verizon (NYSE: VZ) Retirees Proxy Says Separate
Office of Chairman & CEO, we are advised by a representative of the company
that the second paragraph, second sentence, should read "According to C.
William Jones, who will present this proposal at the annual meeting..." rather
than "According to Mr. Jones..." as originally issued inadvertently.

------
Verizon Retirees Proxy Says Separate Office of Chairman & CEO
NEW YORK, March 31 /PRNewswire/ -- Retirees of Verizon Communications
(NYSE: VZ), who in 2007 successfully passed a "Say on Executive Pay" proxy,
garnering 50.18% of shareowner vote, are back for their 11th consecutive proxy
campaign, this year proposing to separate the offices of Chairman and CEO at
Verizon. This year's annual meeting is May 1 in Lincoln, Nebraska.
The proposer, The Association of BellTel Retirees Inc.
(www.BellTelRetirees.org) is seeking the company's board of directors to adopt
a policy requiring that future Board chairmen be selected only from the
independent directors who have not served as an executive officer of the
company. According to C. William Jones, who will present this proposal at the
annual meeting, separating the roles of Chairman and CEO is fundamental to
sound corporate governance.
"How can the CEO be his own boss? Directors are responsible for
protecting the shareholders' interests, which includes monitoring and
evaluating the CEO's performance. When the CEO is also the chairman of the
board, there is an ambiguity about who is working for whom. There is a built
in barrier to replacing a poorly performing CEO," said Mr. Jones. The item
will be #5 on the 2008 Verizon shareowners proxy ballot.
Over the last 11 years leaders of the 100,000 member non-profit retiree
association have proposed numerous shareowner proxies that forced corporate
governance changes at the company in 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2007 (History
Attached). In 2007 the Association's successful proxy asked the Verizon Board
of Directors to include an advisory non-binding resolution allowing
shareholders to approve or disapprove of the executive compensation package of
senior executive officers.
"One need only to look at the 2008 Verizon proxy statement and you will
see the retiree association's good governance footprints are all over it,"
said Mr. Jones.
Jones cited several outside reports and studies as proof that the current
board structure isn't helping shareholders. The Corporate Library singled out
Verizon for the second straight year as one of 12 "Pay for Failure" companies
with the worst combination of excessive CEO pay and negative shareholder
returns over the most recent five-year period. In the five fiscal years
through 2006, CEO/Chairman Ivan Seidenberg received $68.6 million in
compensation while total shareholder return was a negative 5%. The Wall
Street Journal (October 18, 2006) reported that after Verizon's stock declined
25% during 2005, the Board decoupled its Chairman/CEO's incentive compensation
from stock appreciation.
Numerous independent studies have shown that companies perform better with
non-executive board chairmen. A 2006 Booz Allen Hamilton Study (CEO
Succession 2005: The Crest of The Wave; May 2006) of the 2,500 largest public
companies concluded that over the previous three years, non-chairmen CEO's
produced shareholder returns three times as high as those of CEO/chairmen.
The study showed that among both American and European companies, firms that
separated the top two jobs produced shareholder returns 5 percentage points
higher on average than those where one person held both posts.
A 2006 report from Moody's concluded that an independent chair improves
board effectiveness: "We believe that arguments against independent board
leadership are outweighed by clarity of accountability and the strengthened
ability of independent directors to respond quickly in a crisis."
"The lack of a truly independent board is especially bad at Verizon," said
Jones. "The Corporate Library considers half the Verizon Board to be non-
independent because the CEO and six "outside related" directors have recently
had a financial relationship with Verizon other than their directorship."
History of Proxy Proposal Victories by The Association and its Leaders:

In 2003 -- The retirees won 59% with their Executive Severance Agreement
proposal. The non-binding proposal limits overly-generous executive
compensation packages and golden parachutes.

In 2003 -- Prior to the annual shareholders meeting, Verizon's board
agreed to another BellTel Proxy, to exclude pension credits (shadow
profits) from the calculation of executive compensation. This measure won
43% of shareholder votes in 2002.

In 2004 -- After Verizon's board failed to implement 2003's Executive
Severance Agreement proposal the retirees authored a binding proposal on
this issue. Verizon relented, agreeing to gain shareholder approval for
future Executive Severance Agreement more than 2.99 times an executive's
base salary and short term bonus.

In 2005 -- Before Verizon's proxy ballot went to shareowners, the company
agreed to a retiree proxy demand to reign-in Supplemental Executive
Retirement Plan (SERP) income for senior executives. In 2004 the retiree
proxy achieved 37% of shareholder vote. Prior to the change, executives
received SERP equal to 32% of combined salary plus bonus for every dollar
above $210,000 during their first 20 years. After the first 20 years, the
SERP rate reduced to 7%. In 2004 the payout amounted to $161 million and
more than $400 million over three years, according to Verizon estimates.
The agreement negotiated by retiree leaders reduced these excessive
amounts including the 32% level down to a range of 4% to 7%.

In 2007 -- Verizon Retirees won 50.18% of shareowner vote for proxy giving
stock holders a "Say on Executive Pay."

In 2007 -- In the fall of 2006 Association of BellTel Retirees Chief
Financial Officer, Robert Rehm, proposed a proxy, to appear in the 2007
ballot, to limit the number of corporate boards a Verizon director can
serve on. After its submission Verizon changed its Corporate Governance
Guidelines to "provide that a Director who serves as an executive officer
of a public company should not serve on more than three public company
boards," and that other directors "should not serve on more than six
public company boards." After this governance change Mr. Rehm then
withdrew his proposal.

SOURCE The Association of BellTel Retirees Inc.

Tom Butler, Ext 6982, TButler@ButlerAssociates.com, Stu Miller, Ext 6980,
Smiller@ButlerAssociates.com, both of The Association of BellTel Retirees
Inc., +1-212-685-4600