Based on the wording of the article, it seems that the satellite is in the wrong orbit not because of the fault with the first stage but because the second stage wasn't allowed to make a correction burn due to NASA rules.
I'm not that well informed here, but my guess is it was a combination of both. They mention
> the extra burn time [of the first stage] left the rocket with insufficient propellant to safely place the Orbcomm satellite into a higher orbit.
I take that to mean that at the time when the first stage ran out of fuel, they were still within the "no-space-junk" threshold where they weren't allowed to separate/jettison the first stage (if that's how it works).
If the first stage had gone smoothly and left them with enough propellant, they would have used that propellant to climb out of ISS danger zone, and then fire the second stage safely.
> the extra burn time [of the first stage] left the rocket with insufficient propellant to safely place the Orbcomm satellite into a higher orbit.
I take that to mean that at the time when the first stage ran out of fuel, they were still within the "no-space-junk" threshold where they weren't allowed to separate/jettison the first stage (if that's how it works).
If the first stage had gone smoothly and left them with enough propellant, they would have used that propellant to climb out of ISS danger zone, and then fire the second stage safely.