MULTIPLE RWY OP INTERSECTING APCHS ACR X HAD CONFLICT WITH B-737 WHILE ON VISUAL APCH.

Narrative

ACR X PASSING 10 NM S OF FFU WE WERE HANDED OFF TO SLC APCH CTL WHO GAVE US SUCCESSIVELY LOWER ALTS. WE WERE ALSO GIVEN A HDG TO INTERCEPT THE RWY 34 LOC. AS WE CONTINUED NBOUND TOWARD THE ARPT WE COULD SEE SEVERAL ACFT W OF THE ARPT ON L IFR DOWNWIND TO RWY 34 AND AN ACFT TURNING A L BASE. AFTER ASKING US IF WE HAD THE ARPT IN SIGHT; SLC APCH CTL CLRED US FOR A VISUAL APCH TO RWY 35; ADDING THAT OUR TFC WAS A 737 ON A VISUAL TO RWY 34 WHO HAD US IN SIGHT. SINCE THESE 2 FINALS TO RWYS 34 AND 35 INTERSECT S OF THE ARPT; THE FO MADE A R TURN TO KEEP US TO THE R OF THE FINAL APCH COURSE UNTIL N OF THE POINT WHERE THE FINALS DIVERGE. HE ALSO LEVELED OFF TO PROVIDE VERT SEPARATION FROM THE 737 WHICH WAS THEN TURNING FINAL FOR RWY 34. OUR SPD WAS 20-30 KTS FASTER; SO WE PASSED ABOVE AND TO THE R OF THE 737 SO I WAS ABLE TO KEEP IT IN SIGHT. WE PASSED ABOUT 300 FT ABOVE (TCASII) AND 800-1000 FT TO THE R OF THE 737. AFTER WE WERE WELL CLR OF THE 737; WE TURNED L TO REINTERCEPT THE RWY 35 CTRLINE AND DSNDED TO INTERCEPT THE RWY 35 GS AND WE CONTINUED TO AN UNEVENTFUL LNDG. IN THIS PROC OF CLRING 2 ACFT FOR VISUALS TO 2 DIFFERENT RWYS WITH INTERCEPTING FINALS; ONE TURNS FINAL AND THE OTHER OVERTAKES THE FIRST. IT RESULTS IN A SIT IN WHICH THE CREWS OF BOTH ACFT ARE VERY APPREHENSIVE. ADDITIONALLY; A SMALL DISTR OR MISCALCULATION COULD RESULT IN THE LOSS OF TFC SEPARATION. IT IS; ONCE AGAIN; A CASE OF ATC NOT PROVIDING ADEQUATE SEQUENCING; AND THEN DUMPING THE RESPONSIBILITY ON THE PLTS.