No. Process-adaptation costs are business expenses, not an immigration requirement. What the petition must show financially is the ability to pay the transferee, and for a new office the ability to start and sustain operations. Immigration fees themselves follow the USCIS fee schedule.
Keep engineering spend and petition evidence in different columns
Companies sometimes assume that heavy investment in the U.S. line strengthens an L-1B case. It does not, except indirectly: what USCIS assesses is whether the beneficiary has specialized knowledge and whether the petitioner can compensate her. For a U.S. plant that has operated less than a year, the petitioner must also show it has secured premises and has the financial ability to begin doing business and pay her. Beyond that, the cost of recalibrating sorters, buying freezers or adapting the grading scheme is a commercial matter. The immigration fees are set out in the USCIS fee schedule, Form G-1055: the Form I-129 fee, any premium-processing charge and the employer-side surcharges that depend on the petitioner's size and composition. Check the schedule on the filing date. If the family wants employment-authorization documents for convenience, those carry their own fee and their own processing time.
Hypothetical example: a robotics-safety company pays to adapt its proprietary test fixture for a U.S. line. The first review separates those ordinary launch costs from the evidence proving the transferee's specialized knowledge. Invoices may corroborate that the project is real, but they do not establish the legal criterion. The stronger record identifies why this employee, based on prior controlled training and use, is needed to implement the adaptation.