Wow. I'm pretty surprised. I thought chelation was a completely discredited treatment. It's considered to be totally ineffective and potentially dangerous.
If your child has legitimate heavy metal poisoning then it can be undertaken. The reason I say "legitimate" is because there are doctors out there who do the wrong kind of test and then declare in error that your child has too high a level of heavy metals.
Please visit this website http://www.chelationwatch.org/
It has tons of information. You might want to particularly check the section called "Inappropriate testing" and look at some of the other articles.
If you think you should still go through with this, please go to your child's regular pediatrician for a second opinion and testing to ensure that he has received proper testing and that he does indeed NEED chelation - which would be extremely rare.
This is something I would never try with my children without absolute definitive proof that it was 100% necessary.

I wouldn't do it,many doctors like to take advantage of us and the vulnerable desperate state us parents our in.My boy is doing well and never had to do IV chelation.

Please be careful!

Yeah I'm pretty sure that the scientific and medical community agree that chelation is only used for real cases of heavy medal poisoning, like children who eat lead paint chips, and that it is not a legitimate treatment for autism. We did have our daughter tested for heavy metals because we had heard so much about all of this, so when she was in Phoenix Children's Hospital for an endoscopy we requested a blood draw and specified all of the things that we wanted her tested for. We also had the well on our ranch tested and the paint and flooring tested. All of it came with everything well below normal levels. It is possible that an autistic child could be contaminated with lead if they eat lead paint or live near contamination, but it could happen to plenty of other kids too. I would never do this to my child unless tests coming back from a regular hospital and regular blood lab showed that it was absolutely medically necessary without any doubt.

Has he done any testing to confirm metal toxicity? If yes, then I would consider oral chelation but NEVER IV (because if anything goes wrong, the doctors in the ER have a very little time to control the situation).

Take a look at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19852789 on how oral chelation can be performed. It may be slower than IV but I would prefer slower than spending time in ER (if it goes that way).

Still, this article does not talk about metal toxicity in the hard to reach area (like mitochondria) because there will always be some kind of stuff in easily accessible area of the body and AFAIK, there is no scientific evidence on where the stuff is pulled out from..

Before you go this route, try something else. This is my theory from informed science. When a metal ion is bound anywhere in the cell/body, the binding takes place through valency of the ion. The ion can always be replaced if a substitute is available and the body is smart enough to understand what is good and what is not. So if the better ion is available, the body would accept and replace the bad one. If you note the kind of metals claimed to be pulled out, majority are either divalent or have a state of divalency, along with others. For last 2 years, I am giving DS daily Magnesium-Citrate (100mg/day) and Zinc Sulphate (25mg/day). Since I did not do any testing whatsoever, I can not confirm my theory but DS did show a great improvement (the credit also goes to his therapists, the school and all others involved).
The point I am getting at is, if your child is young enough, you could go this way for fer months, do the testing again and see if chelation is *really* needed.