While it is possible that the OP's goof caused an audit of previous reports, that is far from necessarily the case. Further, when a 'formula' you have established for a shop is met with positive reinforcement, you do tend to stay with that 'formula', whether you even revisit old narratives to read how you handled it before or not. Obviously copy and paste of old narratives is not appropriate, but I am going to presume that was not the intent here when having an old shop and a current shop open simultaneously.
There are shops I have performed several hundred times where the successful 'formula' for them is a chronological narrative that answers each of the questionnaire items. When there is well trained staff, those narratives will 'smell' very much the same because there are only so many ways that one can describe a sequence of behaviors. I suspect that if you picked at random 6 of my shops where the staff was well trained you would find that the sequence and wording was virtually the same, even though the older shops were not reopened when writing the new one. How many different ways can you efficiently and uniquely say, "She stood to greet me, introduced herself as she offered me a handshake and invited me to take a seat."? Or how many different ways can you say, "The soda had the correct mix of syrup and carbonation for the correct flavor."? Any shopper is likely to have their 'signature' phraseology, but that is not indicative of a copy and paste.
While it is possible to protest in writing, my suggestion is that the OP speak with their scheduler because we get much more information from verbal conversation than from written communication, even when the words are exactly the same. We hear hesitance, hurt, genuineness and concern in ways that the written word cannot solely convey.