It can, if the procedure is the company's own and the knowledge is distinct from what an engineer in the trade would ordinarily have. The test is about the company's product, process or procedures, not the engineer's general competence.
The knowledge must belong to the company's way of doing things
The statutory definition covers special knowledge of the petitioner's product, service, research, equipment, techniques or management and its application in international markets, or an advanced level of knowledge of the company's processes and procedures. A calibration procedure written inside the Mount Pearl company for its own equipment is a company process. The petition then has to show the engineer's knowledge of it is more than familiarity: that he wrote or substantially developed it, has applied it across projects, and that a new engineer would need meaningful time and internal training to reach the same level. The knowledge does not need to be unique to him, and the company does not have to prove nobody else in the world could learn it. It does have to be different in kind from the mechanical-engineering knowledge his degree gave him. If the honest description is that he is simply the most experienced engineer available, the petition needs more than that.
Hypothetical example: a paving-materials producer seeks to transfer a materials scientist who developed its proprietary cold-weather asphalt blend. The first review should identify the formula controls, test results, and internal training that show knowledge beyond ordinary materials science. Dated laboratory records and controlled specifications settle the claim better than a job title. If the U.S. assignment is simply routine quality testing, the company must explain which decisions require the proprietary knowledge or revise its plan before filing.