EXHIBIT 99.1

January 28, 2017

XTO Energy Inc.

810 Houston Street, Suite 2000

Fort Worth, TX 76102

Re: Underlying Properties (100%)

Relating to the Hugoton Royalty Trust

As of December 31, 2016SEC Pricing Case

Gentlemen:

At your request, Miller and Lents, Ltd. (MLL) estimated
the proved reserves and future net revenues as of December 31, 2016, attributable to the XTO Energy Inc. (XTO) interest in certain oil and gas properties prior to inclusion in the Hugoton Royalty Trust, i.e., Underlying Properties (100%). The
Underlying Properties (100%) include working interest properties from which net profits interests were conveyed to the Hugoton Royalty Trust. The properties consist of approximately 1,454 leases and 1,586 wells located primarily in Kansas,
Oklahoma, and Wyoming. The aggregate results of MLLs evaluations are as follows:



|                                   |  |                          |         |  |                     |  |          |                 |  |  |                              |  |  |  |          | 
|---------------------------------- |  | ------------------------ | ------- |  | ------------------- |  | -------- | --------------- |  |  | ---------------------------- |  |  |  | -------- | 
|                                   |  | Net Reserves             |         |  | Future Net Revenues | 
|Reserves Category                  |  | Oil andCondensate,MBbls. |         |  | Gas,MMcf            |  |          | Undiscounted,M$ |  |  | Discounted at10% Per Year,M$ | 
|Kansas                             | 
|Proved Developed Producing         |  |                          | 33.3    |  |                     |  | 5,472.7  |                 |  |  | 3,435.8                      |  |  |  | 2,439.3  | 
|Proved Developed Nonproducing      |  |                          | 0.0     |  |                     |  | 265.4    |                 |  |  | 170.1                        |  |  |  | 70.7     | 
|                                   |  |                          |         |  |                     |  |          |                 |  |  |                              |  |  |  |          | 
|Subtotal                           |  |                          | 33.3    |  |                     |  | 5,738.1  |                 |  |  | 3,605.8                      |  |  |  | 2,509.9  | 
|                                   |  |                          |         |  |                     |  |          |                 |  |  |                              |  |  |  |          | 
|Oklahoma                           |  |                          |         |  |                     |  |          |                 |  |  |                              |  |  |  |          | 
|Proved Developed Producing         |  |                          | 1,034.0 |  |                     |  | 65,859.6 |                 |  |  | 61,036.5                     |  |  |  | 40,613.0 | 
|Proved Undeveloped                 |  |                          | 0.0     |  |                     |  | 733.8    |                 |  |  | 214.3                        |  |  |  | -105.1   | 
|                                   |  |                          |         |  |                     |  |          |                 |  |  |                              |  |  |  |          | 
|Subtotal                           |  |                          | 1,034.0 |  |                     |  | 66,593.4 |                 |  |  | 61,250.8                     |  |  |  | 40,507.8 | 
|                                   |  |                          |         |  |                     |  |          |                 |  |  |                              |  |  |  |          | 
|Wyoming                            |  |                          |         |  |                     |  |          |                 |  |  |                              |  |  |  |          | 
|Proved Developed Producing         |  |                          | 29.7    |  |                     |  | 20,136.4 |                 |  |  | 10,701.6                     |  |  |  | 8,074.8  | 
|                                   |  |                          |         |  |                     |  |          |                 |  |  |                              |  |  |  |          | 
|Subtotal                           |  |                          | 29.7    |  |                     |  | 20,136.4 |                 |  |  | 10,701.6                     |  |  |  | 8,074.8  | 
|                                   |  |                          |         |  |                     |  |          |                 |  |  |                              |  |  |  |          | 
|Total Underlying Properties (100%) |  |                          |         |  |                     |  |          |                 |  |  |                              |  |  |  |          | 
|Proved Developed Producing         |  |                          | 1,097.0 |  |                     |  | 91,468.7 |                 |  |  | 75,173.8                     |  |  |  | 51,127.1 | 
|Proved Developed Nonproducing      |  |                          | 0.0     |  |                     |  | 265.4    |                 |  |  | 170.1                        |  |  |  | 70.7     | 
|Proved Undeveloped                 |  |                          | 0.0     |  |                     |  | 733.8    |                 |  |  | 214.3                        |  |  |  | -105.1   | 
|                                   |  |                          |         |  |                     |  |          |                 |  |  |                              |  |  |  |          | 
|TOTAL                              |  |                          | 1,097.0 |  |                     |  | 92,467.9 |                 |  |  | 75,558.2                     |  |  |  | 51,092.6 | 
|                                   |  |                          |         |  |                     |  |          |                 |  |  |                              |  |  |  |          | 

The report was prepared for the use of XTO in its financial and reserves reporting and was completed on January 27,
2017. MLL performed evaluations, which are designated as the SEC Pricing Case, using price and expense premises specified by XTO and described in detail on Attachment 1.



---

|                |  |                        
|--------------- |  | -----------------------
|XTO Energy Inc. |  | January 28, 2017 Page
2



Proved reserves and future net revenues were estimated in
accordance with the provisions contained in Securities and Exchange Commission Regulation S-X, Rule 4-10(a). The Securities and Exchange Commission definition of proved reserves is shown on Attachment 2 (not included). Gas volumes for each property
are stated at the pressure and temperature bases appropriate for the sales contract or state regulatory authority; therefore, some of the aggregated totals may be stated at a mixed pressure base. No provisions for the possible consequences, if any,
of product sales imbalances were included in our projections since MLL received no relevant data. Estimates of future net revenues and discounted future net revenues are not intended and should not be interpreted to represent fair market values for
the estimated reserves. In MLLs projections, future costs of abandoning facilities and wells were assumed to be offset by salvage values. Estimated costs, if any, for restoration of producing properties to satisfy environmental standards are
beyond the scope of this assignment.

Following Attachment 2 (not included) is a list of exhibits that include annual projections of future
production and net revenues for each state and reserves category. Also included in the exhibits are one-line summaries for the total royalty trust and for each state showing the proved reserves and future net revenues for the individual properties.
Projections of individual property future production and net revenues are included in separate volumes to this report. These exhibits and volumes should not be relied upon independently of this narrative.

The proved developed producing reserves and production forecasts were estimated by production decline extrapolations, water-oil ratio trends, P/Z
declines, or in a few cases, by volumetric calculations. For some properties with insufficient performance history to establish trends, MLL estimated future production by analogy with other properties with similar characteristics. The past
performance trends of many properties were influenced by production curtailments, workovers, waterfloods, and/or infill drilling. Actual future production may require that MLLs estimated trends be significantly altered. Reserves estimates from
volumetric calculations and from analogies are often less certain than reserves estimates based on well performance obtained over a period during which a substantial portion of the reserves was produced.

The estimated proved developed nonproducing reserves can be produced from existing well bores but require capital costs for recompletions or for
pipeline connections. These proved developed nonproducing reserves estimates were based on analogies with other wells that commercially produce from the same formation in the same field. The timing of initial production was usually provided to us by
XTO. When actual production history is available for these nonproducing reserves, MLLs reserves estimates may be significantly revised.

The
estimated proved undeveloped reserves require significant capital expenditures, such as for planned drilling and completion costs. The proved undeveloped reserves estimates for infill wells are based on analogies to similar infill wells in the same
field and/or the production histories of offset wells in the same field. As actual results of the planned drilling become available, MLLs reserves estimates may be significantly revised.

The data employed in MLLs estimations of proved reserves and future net income were provided by XTO. The current expenses for each lease were
obtained from operating statements provided by XTO except for certain leases where XTO deducted items considered by XTO to be nonrecurring expenditures. No overhead was included for those properties operated by XTO. For some properties, such as
large waterfloods, XTO assumed a decline in operating costs due to depleting production that was derived by forecasting a decrease in the property well count. For some gas properties, XTO assumed operating costs would be split between a variable
component and a fixed component. The variable component was a constant cost per thousand cubic feet of gas production and the fixed component was a constant cost per well completion. The data provided to MLL by XTO, including, but not limited to,
graphical representations and tabulations of past production performance, well tests and pressures, ownership interests, prices, capital expenditures, and operating costs were accepted as represented and were considered appropriate for the purpose
of this report. MLL employed all methods, data, procedures, and assumptions considered necessary and appropriate in utilizing the data provided to prepare this report.

The evaluations presented in this report, with the exceptions of those parameters specified by others, reflect MLLs informed judgments and are
subject to the inherent uncertainties associated with interpretation of geological, geophysical, and engineering information. These uncertainties include, but are not limited to, (1) the utilization of analogous or indirect data and
(2) the application of professional judgments. Government policies and market conditions different from those



---

|                |  |                        
|--------------- |  | -----------------------
|XTO Energy Inc. |  | January 28, 2017 Page
3



employed in this study may cause (1) the total quantity of oil, natural gas liquids, or gas to be recovered, (2) actual production rates, (3) prices received, or (4) operating
and capital costs to vary from those presented in this report. At this time, MLL is not aware of any regulations that would affect XTOs ability to recover the estimated reserves.

Miller and Lents, Ltd. is an independent oil and gas consulting firm. No director, officer, or key employee of Miller and Lents, Ltd. has any financial
ownership in XTO Energy Inc. or any related company. MLLs compensation for the required investigations and preparation of this report is not contingent on the results obtained and reported, and we have not performed other work that would
affect MLLs objectivity. Production of this report was supervised by Robert J. Oberst, P.E., an officer of the firm who is a licensed Professional Engineer in the State of Texas and is professionally qualified, with more than 25 years of
relevant experience, in the estimation, assessment, and evaluation of oil and gas reserves.

MLLs work papers and data are in our files and
available for review upon request. If you have any questions regarding the above, or if MLL can be of further assistance, please call.



Yours very truly,MILLER AND LENTS, LTD.Texas Registered Engineering Firm No. F-1442By

/S/ ROBERT J. OBERSTRobert J. Oberst, P. E.Chairman


RJO/slc



---

|                |  |                        
|--------------- |  | -----------------------
|XTO Energy Inc. |  | January 28, 2017 Page
4



Attachment 1

Hugoton Royalty Trust (100%)

SEC PRICING CASE



|A. Oil Price | Average price during the 12-month period prior to 12/31/16 determined as the arithmetical average of the first-day-of-the-month price for each month during the year 2016. The average price was based on the West Texas Intermediate benchmark
price. The arithmetical average of the first-day-of-the-month benchmark prices is $42.75 per barrel and is held constant through the life of the property. The average realized price, after appropriate adjustments, is $39.08 per barrel.
|------------ | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|B. Gas Price | Average price during the 12-month period prior to 12/31/16 determined as the arithmetical average of the first-day-of-the-month price for each month during the year 2016. The average price was based on the Henry Hub benchmark price. The
arithmetical average of the first-day-of-the-month benchmark price is $2.48 per MMBtu and is held constant through the life of the property. The average realized price, after appropriate adjustments is $1.94 per Mcf.
|------------ | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|C. Operating Costs | Current expenses held constant through the life of the property. For some properties, expenses included a variable component that was a constant cost per unit of gas production and a fixed component that was a constant cost per well completion.
|------------------ | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|D. Discount Rate | 10% per year.
|---------------- | -------------