Few authors have investigated the origins of green chemistry (GC). Most literature relies on a narrative of its birth at the US Environmental Protection Agency in the 1990s through the original work by Paul Anastas and John Warner and the successful networking and institutionalizing activities that followed. However, this perspective has two drawbacks: it fails to consider the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) political background (without which individual action would not have been possible), and it highlights a contradiction between the revolutionary theoretical message of the founders of GC and their strategy of promotion, which is uncritical of “brown” chemistry and excludes participation by civil society and the public. I argue that GC is not only the success of enthusiastic individuals who took advantage of existing political resources to promote a new vision of greening research and innovation but is also an expression of major political changes and a tool for managing chemical risks at the EPA in the 1990s. Using the concept of “design,” I argue that GC is a tool illustrating the EPA’s comanagement approach with the regulated industry. The paper sheds light on how authorities react to the difficulties of regulating chemical risks.