EXHIBIT 99.1

January 31, 2014

XTO Energy Inc.

810 Houston Street, Suite 2000

Fort Worth, TX 76102



Re:



Underlying Properties (100%)Relating to the Cross Timbers Royalty TrustAs of December 31, 2013SEC Pricing


Case

Gentlemen:

At your request, Miller and Lents, Ltd. (MLL) estimated the proved reserves and future net revenues as of December 31, 2013, attributable
to the XTO Energy Inc. (XTO) interest in certain oil and gas properties prior to inclusion in the Cross Timbers Royalty Trust, i.e., Underlying Properties (100%). The properties consist of approximately 2,917 leases and 15,931 wells and are located
primarily in New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas.

The report was prepared for the use of XTO in its financial and reserves reporting and was
completed on January 31, 2014. MLL performed evaluations, which are designated as the SEC Pricing Case, using price and expense premises specified by you and described in detail on Attachment 1. The aggregate results of MLLs evaluations
are as follows:



|                                              |  |                            |  |                     |  |                  |  |                              
|--------------------------------------------- |  | -------------------------- |  | ------------------- |  | ---------------- |  | -----------------------------
|                                              |  |                           
|                                              |  | Net Reserves               |  | Future Net Revenues
|                                              |  |                            |  |                    
|Reserves Category                             |  | Oil and
Condensate,
MBbls. |  | Gas,
MMcf           |  | Undiscounted,
M$ |  | Discounted at10% per Year,
M$
|Working Interest Properties                   |  |                            |  |                     |  |                  |  |                              
|Proved Developed Producing                    |  | 1,761.6                    |  | 846.0               |  | 59,237.0         |  | 33,476.7                     
|Subtotal                                      |  | 1,761.6                    |  | 846.0               |  | 59,237.0         |  | 33,476.7                     
|Royalty Interest Properties                   |  |                            |  |                     |  |                  |  |                              
|Proved Developed Producing                    |  | 540.3                      |  | 22,725.6            |  | 150,802.4        |  | 74,938.8                     
|Subtotal                                      |  | 540.3                      |  | 22,725.6            |  | 150,802.4        |  | 74,938.8                     
|Total Working and Royalty Interest Properties |  |                            |  |                     |  |                  |  |                              
|Proved Developed Producing                    |  | 2,301.9                    |  | 23,571.6            |  | 210,039.4        |  | 108,415.5                    
|Total Proved                                  |  | 2,301.9                    |  | 23,571.6            |  | 210,039.4        |  | 108,415.5                    



---

XTO Energy Inc.

January 31, 2014

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
reserves category, interest type, and state. Also included in the exhibits are one-line summaries showing the proved reserves and future net revenues for each property in the total royalty trust, in the working interest category, in the royalty
interest category, and in each state. 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 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. The data provided to us by XTO, including, but not limited to, graphical representations
and tabulations of past production performance, well tests and pressures, ownership interests, prices, 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



---

XTO Energy Inc.

January 31, 2014

Page 3

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 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. Preparation of this report was supervised by James C. Pearson, 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 30 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-1442




By

/S/ JAMES C. PEARSONJames C. Pearson, P. E.Chairman


JCP/slc



---

XTO Energy Inc.

January 31, 2014

Page 4

Attachment 1

12/31/13

Cross Timbers Royalty Trust (100%)

SEC PRICING CASE



|   |  |                 |  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
|-- |  | --------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   |  |                
|A. |  | Oil Price       |  | Average price during the 12-month period prior to 12/31/13 determined as the arithmetical average of the first-day-of-the-month price for each month during the year 2013. The average price was $91.03 per barrel and was held constant
through the life of the property.
|   |  |                
|B. |  | Gas/NGL Price   |  | Average price during the 12-month period prior to 12/31/13 determined as the arithmetical average of the first-day-of-the-month price for each month during the year 2013. The average price was $5.15 per Mcf and was held constant
through the life of the property.    
|   |  |                
|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.