Fix logic for ctl%rof_from_glc

[billsacks]

This is a minor issue that doesn't cause any problems in practice right now, but should probably be fixed to avoid creating problems in the future.

The logic for ctl%rof_from_glc is:

MOSART/src/cpl/nuopc/rof_import_export.F90

Lines 231 to 235 in bd5c270

	if (fldchk(importState, 'Fgrg_rofl') .and. fldchk(importState, 'Fgrg_rofl')) then
	ctl%rof_from_glc = .true.
	else
	ctl%rof_from_glc = .false.
	end if

Note the duplication of Fgrg_rofl as opposed to Fgrg_rofi.

I think the right logic here is something like:

if (fldchk(importState, 'Fgrg_rofl') .and. fldchk(importState, 'Fgrg_rofi')) then
   ctl%rof_from_glc = .true.
else if (fldchk(importState, 'Fgrg_rofl') .or. fldchk(importState, 'Fgrg_rofi')) then
   ! ABORT WITH AN ERROR: I think it should never be the case that one of these fields is present but not the other; I think if it could be the case, some other code may need to be generalized to allow for this possibility
else
   ctl%rof_from_glc = .false.
end if

But I'd like a second set of eyes on that to make sure it looks right.

Tagging @olyson who rediscovered this issue that I had mentioned as a side note in #103 (comment) but never followed up on. And tagging @ekluzek or @slevis-lmwg , who were involved in that earlier discussion.

[slevis-lmwg]

@billsacks thank you for bringing this back to the surface. In retrospect, we should have opened the issue while working on #103.

In any case, this logic seems correct to me. I will state the obvious just to state it out loud: The "else if" does not risk finding both terms true because the "if" takes care of that.