Anything in any of my reports that remotely resembles "boilerplate" is at least 50% report-specific... i.e. if I say that "the subject has close proximity to important linkages"... then I start listing the important linkages (I-95, Rt. 1, I-276, I-476, Rt. 13, Rt. 40, etc)... or, if I say that "the subject has close proximity to main employments centers" then I'll start listing them as well (Bank of America, JPMorganChase, Dupont, AstraZeneca, State Farm Insurance, etc., etc). This way, every report has report-specific commentary. Also, one of my instructors gave me this great piece of advice: when doing a portion of the report which is typically long (i.e. the market analysis section), use at least one piece of information which is less than 30 days old. I generally use at least 3-5 pieces of information which are less than 30 days old. It shows that you analyzed the market instead of just plopping in some kind of canned response. Besides, after speaking with many of my clients, I have learned that you don't have to be an appraiser to detect canned comments... and 9.8 times out of 10 it makes a client look at your report with a more discriminating eye if the only thing that they see is canned commentary.
I won't make a direct judgement about your mentor... but if what you say about him "not having time" for you is even remotely true... then I would follow the advice above from some of our trusted Forum members.
19/more jobs per week... is this just his workload or the ENTIRE OFFICE'S workload?