ACR X TCASII TA ISSUED TFC FROM CPR Y ON MULTIPLE RWY OP PARALLEL APCHS.

Narrative

ACR X HAD TO EXECUTE A MISSED APCH DUE TO A TCASII TFC CONFLICT. DEN APCH HAD ISSUED A CLRNC TO MAINTAIN A HDG OF 190 DEGS TO INTERCEPT THE RWY 17L ILS LOC; MAINTAIN 8000 FT MSL UNTIL ESTABLISHED; CLRED FOR THE RWY 17L ILS/DME 1 APCH; CONTACT DEN TWR AT TARGS (FAF). AS ACR X APCHED TARGS DSNDING ON THE GS; OUR TCASII BEGAN TO INDICATE A CONFLICT WITH AN ACFT I BELIEVE BELOW AND TO OUR R AND SLIGHTLY BEHIND. AT TARGS THE CAPT RPTED INBOUND TO THE TWR AND ASKED IF THE TFC WAS FOR A PARALLEL RWY 18. THE TWR INSTRUCTED US TO TURN L IMMEDIATELY TO A HDG OF 080 DEGS AND CLB TO 8000 MSL AS WE WERE DSNDING THROUGH 7600 FT MSL. WE EXECUTED AN IMMEDIATE MISSED APCH TURNING AND CLBING AS INSTRUCTED. AFTER LNDG OUR COMPANY ATC REPRESENTATIVE WAS NOTIFIED AND HE CONTACTED BOTH THE DENVER CTR AND TWR. HE WAS TOLD BY THE AREA SUPVR THAT THERE WAS NO CONFLICT AS THE ACFT IN QUESTION WAS CPR Y ON A LOC TO RWY 18 AND THE TWR HAD INSTRUCTED US TO ABANDON THE APCH DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE TWR WAS NOT IN RADIO CONTACT WITH THE CPR Y. SINCE THE TWR DID HAVE US WE WERE CHOSEN. I FIND THIS DIFFICULT TO BELIEVE BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT AS WE WERE EXECUTING OUR MISSED APCH A COMPANY FLT WAS CALLING TARGS INBOUND. IF THERE IS AN ACFT WHICH WILL BE IN CLOSE PROX THE APCH CTLR SHOULD MAKE YOU AWARE. HOWEVER; I PERSONALLY DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THE CPR Y WAS THE PROBLEM.