said by nunya:
No. If you were extending an existing K&T installation with more K&T, then by this technicality it would be permitted. Most municipalities will not allow it anyway.
334.108 required NM cable to be manufactured with a EGC (the one we see flapping in the breeze in the OP's pic).
In multiple parts of art 250 (ex 250.120), the EGC must be utilized and functional on all new work.
If it's the other way around, where the romex is feeding K&T, then it's just a matter of the local municipalities rules. If that K&T was exposed and could have been replaced, then it should have been replaced. There's really no excuse for leaving it in place. As I mentioned before, in most places it's mandatory. While it's common sense that it should be replaced, some customers will squeeze a dime until it shits a quarter, if you know what I mean.
If that's just the tail end of undisturbed K&T being fed from new romex, then it's OK. It definitely should have been brought up in conversation with the GC and Owner: "Hey, do you want to go ahead and get this shit out of the building now while we are here..."
Agree. The K & T should be removed in a renovation.