Exhibit 99.1

CAWLEY, GILLESPIE & ASSOCIATES, INC.

PETROLEUM
CONSULTANTS

13640 BRIARWICK DRIVE, SUITE 100

306 WEST SEVENTH STREET, SUITE 302

1000 LOUISIANA STREET, SUITE 625AUSTIN, TEXAS 78729-1107

FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102-4987

HOUSTON, TEXAS 77002-5008512-249-7000

817- 336-2461

713-651-9944www.cgaus.com


February 19, 2013

Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A.
as Trustee of MV Oil TrustAttn: Mike Ulrich
919 Congress Avenue
Austin, Texas 78701


Re:

Evaluation Summary MV Oil Trust Net Profits InterestsTotal Proved Reserves
Certain Oil and Gas AssetsKS & CO
As of December 31, 2012

Pursuant to the Guidelines of the Securities and Exchange Commission for
Reporting Corporate Reserves and
Future Net Revenue


Gentlemen:

As
requested, this report was prepared on February 19, 2013 for MV Oil Trust ("Trust") for the purpose of submitting our estimates of total proved reserves and forecasts of
economics attributable to the Trust term net profits interests. We evaluated 100% of the Trust reserves, which are made up of oil and gas properties in Kansas and Colorado owned by MV
Partners, LLC ("Company"). This evaluation, effective December 31, 2012, was prepared using constant prices and costs, and conforms to Item 1202(a)(8) of
Regulation S-K and other rules of theSecurities and Exchange Commission(SEC). A composite summary of the proved reserves is
presented below.

Proved
Developed
Producing

Proved
Developed
Non-Producing

Proved
Undeveloped

Total
ProvedNet ReservesOil

- MBBL


7,757.9


79.6


1,045.5


8,882.9Gas

- MMCF


456.7


145.8


0.0


602.5NGL

- MBBL


28.4


0.0


0.0


28.4RevenueOil

- M$


679,667.4


6,970.2


91,592.0


778,229.6Gas

- M$


1,202.7


389.1


0.0


1,591.8NGL

- M$


1,194.7


0.0


0.0


1,194.7Severance Taxes

- M$


3,134.1


327.8


3,938.5


7,400.4Ad Valorem Taxes

- M$


20,426.1


214.2


2,724.8


23,365.1Operating Expenses

- M$


179,150.3


1,144.2


8,274.2


188,568.7Workover Expenses

- M$


10,946.7


0.0


0.0


10,946.7COPAS

- M$


33,952.3


117.2


809.9


34,879.3Investments

- M$


0.0


1,139.0


11,054.5


12,193.580% NPI Net Cash Flow (BFIT)

- M$


347,564.3


3,533.5


51,832.1


402,929.980% NPI Disc. @ 10%(Present Worth)

- M$


218,087.3


2,063.6


32,287.4


252,438.3


1

---



Future revenuewas calculated prior to deducting state production taxes and ad valorem taxes; however,future net
cash flowwas calculated after deducting these taxes, future capital costs and operating expenses, but before federal income taxes.Future net cash
flowhas been discounted at an annual rate of ten (10) percent, in accordance with SEC guidelines, to determinenet present
worth. Present worth indicates the time value of money and should not be construed as being fair market value.

The
oil reserves include oil and condensate. Oil volumes are expressed in barrels (42 U.S. gallons). Gas volumes are expressed in thousands of standard cubic feet (Mcf) at contract
temperature and pressure base.

Our
estimates include proved reserves only. Neither probable or possible reserves, nor interest in acreage beyond the location of proven reserves have been estimated.

Net Profits Calculations

The net profits interests entitle the Trust to receive 80% of the net proceeds from the sale of hydrocarbon production within the
Company underlying properties. The net profits interests will terminate on the later to occur of (1) June 30, 2026, or (2) the time when 14.4 million barrels of oil
equivalent ("MMBOE") have been produced from the underlying properties and sold, and the trust will soon thereafter wind up its affairs and terminate. For this report, it was estimated that the Trust
would terminate June 30, 2026 based on the calculation that 14.4 MMBOE would be produced from the underlying properties and sold (which amount is the equivalent of 11.5 MMBOE in respect of the
trust's right to receive 80% of the net proceeds from the underlying properties pursuant to the net profits interest) by July 31, 2024. The cash flow tables in this report reflect the
termination date of June 30, 2026.

Hydrocarbon Pricing

The base SEC oil and gas prices calculated for December 31, 2012 were $94.71/bbl and $2.757/MMBTU, respectively. As specified by
the SEC, a company must use a 12-month average price, calculated as the unweighted arithmetic average of the first-day-of-the-month price
for each month within the 12-month period prior to the end of the reporting period. The base oil price is based upon WTI-Cushing spot prices (EIA) during 2012 and the base gas
price is based upon Henry Hub spot prices (Platts Gas Daily) during 2012.

Oil
price differentials were forecast at -$7.10 per BBL for all properties. Gas price and NGL price differentials varied by property. The base price differentials may include
local basis differentials, transportation, gas shrinkage, gas heating value (BTU content) and/or crude quality and gravity corrections. After these adjustments, the net realized prices for the SEC
price case over the trust life of the proved properties was estimated to be $87.61 per BBL for oil, $42.03 per BBL for NGL and $2.642 per MCF for gas. All economic factors were held constant in
accordance with SEC guidelines.

Economic Parameters

Ownership was accepted as furnished and has not been independently confirmed. Oil and gas price differentials, lease operating expenses
(LOE), workover expenses, overhead expenses and investments were calculated and prepared by you and were thoroughly reviewed by us for accuracy and completeness. LOE (column 22) and overhead
(COPAS, column 26) were determined at the well level using averages determined from historical lease operating statements. Workover Expenses (column 25) were applied to cover the annual costs
for recurring well work and wellbore abandonment. All economic parameters, including expenses and investments, were held constant (not escalated) throughout the life of these properties.

2

---



Severance
tax rates were applied at normal state percentages of oil and gas revenue, except for those Kansas producing properties that are severance tax exempt. Ad valorem taxes of 3.0%
of total revenue were applied to each property as provided by your office. Oil and gas conservation tax rates were applied to all Kansas properties at current rates of $0.091 per BBL and $0.0129 per
MCF, respectively.

SEC Conformance and Regulations

The reserve classifications and the economic considerations used herein for the SEC pricing scenario conform to the criteria of the SEC
as defined in pages three (3) and four (4) of the Appendix. The reserves and economics are predicated on regulatory agency classifications, rules, policies, laws, taxes and royalties
currently in effect except as noted herein. The possible effects of changes in legislation or other Federal or State restrictive actions which could affect the reserves and economics have not been
considered. However, we do not anticipate nor are we aware of any legislative changes or restrictive regulatory actions that may impact the recovery of reserves.

This
evaluation includes 97 proved undeveloped ("PUD") locations based in various fields throughout Kansas and Texas. Each of these drilling locations proposed as part of the Company
development plan conforms to the proved undeveloped standards as set forth by the SEC. In our opinion, the Company has indicated they have intent to complete this development plan within the next five
(5) years. Furthermore, the Company has demonstrated that they have the proper company staffing, financial backing and prior development success to ensure this five (5) year development
plan will be fully executed.

Reserve Estimation Methods

The methods employed in estimating reserves are described in page two (2) of the Appendix. Reserves for proved developed
producing wells were estimated using production performance methods for the vast majority of properties. Certain new producing properties with very little production history were forecast using a
combination of production performance and analogy to similar production, both of which are considered to provide a relatively high degree of accuracy.

Non-producing
reserve estimates, for both developed and undeveloped properties, were forecast using either volumetric or analogy methods, or a combination of both. These
methods provide a relatively high degree of accuracy for predicting proved developed non-producing and proved undeveloped reserves for the Company properties, due to the mature nature of
their properties targeted for development and an abundance of subsurface control data. The assumptions, data, methods and procedures used herein are appropriate for the purpose served by this report.

General Discussion

The estimates and forecasts were based upon interpretations of data furnished by your office and available from our files. To some
extent information from public records has been used to check and/or supplement these data. The basic engineering and geological data were subject to third party reservations and qualifications.
Nothing has come to our attention, however, that would cause us to believe that we are not justified in relying on such data. All estimates represent our best judgment based on the data available at
the time of preparation. Due to inherent uncertainties in future production rates, commodity prices and geologic conditions, it should be realized that the reserve estimates, the reserves actually
recovered, the revenue derived therefrom and the actual cost incurred could be more or less than the estimated amounts.

An
on-site field inspection of the properties has not been performed. The mechanical operation or condition of the wells and their related facilities have not been examined
nor have the wells been tested by Cawley, Gillespie & Associates, Inc. Possible environmental liability related to the properties

3

---



has
not been investigated nor considered. The cost of plugging and the salvage value of equipment at abandonment have been included as part of the workover expenses described previously.

Cawley,
Gillespie & Associates, Inc. is a Texas Registered Engineering Firm (F-693), made up of independent registered professional engineers and geologists
that have provided petroleum consulting services to the oil and gas industry for over 50 years. This evaluation was supervised by W. Todd Brooker, Senior Vice President at Cawley,
Gillespie & Associates, Inc. and a State of Texas Licensed Professional Engineer (License #83462). We do not own an interest in the properties or MV Partners, LLC or MV Oil Trust
and are not employed on a contingent basis. We have used all methods and procedures that we consider necessary under the circumstances to prepare this report. Our work-papers and related
data utilized in the preparation of these estimates are available in our office. We consent to the filing of this report as an exhibit to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of MV Oil
Trust for the year end December 31, 2012.

Yours very truly,GRAPHIC

GRAPHICW. Todd Brooker, P.E. Sr. Vice PresidentCAWLEY, GILLESPIE & ASSOCIATES, INC.Texas Registered Engineering Firm (F-693)


4

---





APPENDIX    Methods Employed in the Estimation of Reserves

The four methods customarily employed in the estimation of reserves are (1)production
performance, (2)material balance, (3)volumetricand
(4)analogy. Most estimates, although based primarily on one method, utilize other methods depending on the nature and extent of the data
available and the characteristics of the reservoirs.

Basic
information includes production, pressure, geological and laboratory data. However, a large variation exists in the quality, quantity and types of information available on
individual properties. Operators are generally required by regulatory authorities to file monthly production reports andmaybe required to measure and
report periodically such data as well pressures, gas-oil ratios, well tests, etc. As a general rule, an operator has complete discretion in obtaining and/or making available geological and
engineering data. The resulting lack of uniformity in data renders impossible the application of identical methods to all properties, and may result in significant differences in the accuracy and
reliability of estimates.

A
brief discussion of each method, its basis, data requirements, applicability and generalization as to its relative degree of accuracy follows:

Production performance.This method employs graphical analyses of production data on the premise that all factors which have controlled
the
performance to date will continue to control and that historical
trends can be extrapolated to predict future performance. The only information required is production history. Capacity production can usually be analyzed from graphs of rates versus time or
cumulative production. This procedure is referred to as "decline curve" analysis. Both capacity and restricted production can, in some cases, be analyzed from graphs of producing rate relationships of
the various production components. Reserve estimates obtained by this method are generally considered to have a relatively high degree of accuracy with the degree of accuracy increasing as production
history accumulates.

Material balance.This method employs the analysis of the relationship of production and pressure performance on the premise that the
reservoir
volume and its initial hydrocarbon content are fixed and that this initial hydrocarbon volume and recoveries therefrom can be estimated by analyzing changes in pressure with respect to production
relationships. This method requires reliable pressure and temperature data, production data, fluid analyses and knowledge of the nature of the reservoir. The material balance method is applicable to
all reservoirs, but the time and expense required for its use is dependent on the nature of the reservoir and its fluids. Reserves for depletion type reservoirs can be estimated from graphs of
pressures corrected for compressibility versus cumulative production, requiring only data that are usually available. Estimates for other reservoir types require extensive data and involve complex
calculations most suited to computer models which makes this method generally applicable only to reservoirs where there is economic justification for its use. Reserve estimates obtained by this method
are generally considered to have a degree of accuracy that is directly related to the complexity of the reservoir and the quality and quantity of data available.

Volumetric.This method employs analyses of physical measurements of rock and fluid properties to calculate the volume of hydrocarbons
in-place. The data required are well information sufficient to determine reservoir subsurface datum, thickness, storage volume, fluid content and location. The volumetric method is most
applicable to reservoirs which are not susceptible to analysis by production performance or material balance methods. These are most commonly newly developed and/or no-pressure depleting
reservoirs. The amount of hydrocarbons in-place that can be recovered is not an integral part of the volumetric calculations but is an estimate inferred by other methods and a knowledge of
the nature of the reservoir. Reserve estimates obtained by this method are generally



Cawley,
Gillespie & Associates, Inc.

5

---



considered
to have a low degree of accuracy; but the degree of accuracy can be relatively high where rock quality and subsurface control is good and the nature of the reservoir is uncomplicated.

Analogy.This method which employs experience and judgment to estimate reserves, is based on observations of similar situations and
includes
consideration of theoretical performance. The analogy method is applicable where the data are insufficient or so inconclusive that reliable reserve estimates cannot be made by other methods. Reserve
estimates obtained by this method are generally considered to have a relatively low degree of accuracy.

Much
of the information used in the estimation of reserves is itself arrived at by the use of estimates. These estimates are subject to continuing change as additional information
becomes available. Reserve estimates which presently appear to be correct may be found to contain substantial errors as time passes and new information is obtained about well and reservoir
performance.



Cawley,
Gillespie & Associates, Inc.

6

---



APPENDIX    Reserve Definitions and Classifications

The Securities and Exchange Commission, in SX Reg. 210.4-10 dated November 18, 1981, as amended on
September 19, 1989 and January 1, 2010, requires adherence to the following definitions of oil and gas reserves:





Cawley,
Gillespie & Associates, Inc.

7

---







Cawley,
Gillespie & Associates, Inc.

8

---





"Note to paragraph (26):

Reserves should not be assigned to adjacent reservoirs isolated by major, potentially sealing, faults until those reservoirs are penetrated and evaluated as economically producible. Reserves should not be assigned to
areas that are clearly separated from a known accumulation by a non-productive reservoir (i.e., absence of reservoir, structurally low reservoir, or negative test results). Such areas may contain prospective resources (i.e., potentially
recoverable resources from undiscovered accumulations)."




Cawley,
Gillespie & Associates, Inc.

9

---



QuickLinks