Safe Hydrogen Bunkering Compressed gaseous hydrogen (CGH2) storage and bunkering represent a viable alternative marine fuel with the potential to be entirely fossil-free. However, the adoption of CGH2 introduces unique challenges and risks that require rigorous assessment to ensure its safe and efficient use. CGH2 is favored for its sustainability potential and comparatively lower economic demands relative to liquid hydrogen. Nevertheless, its physical and chemical properties necessitate enhanced safety measures. CGH2 exhibits a broader flammability range, lower minimum ignition energy, and faster combustion rates compared to conventional fuels such as methane. Additionally, its storage under high pressures exceeding 250 bar implies that leaks may lead to hazardous phenomena, including jet flames or deflagrations (explosions). This report emphasizes the safety of personnel, including crew members, terminal workers, and passengers, while investigating the hazards associated with CGH2 bunkering. To this end, existing literature and regulations pertaining to LNG and hydrogen have been reviewed, stakeholder interviews have been conducted for a Visby case study, and a Hazard Identification (HAZID) analysis has been performed. Key hazards identified include loss of containment due to leaks, pipe, or tank ruptures. To effectively manage the risks of CGH2 bunkering, preventive and mitigative strategies must address multiple dimensions. These include operational limits, technical and physical measures, placement and design considerations, hazardous zones, safety distances, and maintenance protocols. Equally important are human factors such as access control, the establishment of clear safety protocols, well-defined roles and responsibilities, and procedural routines. The individual risk measure is used to ensure that no crew, terminal worker, or passenger is exposed to unacceptable risks. Input values for the individual risk calculation, such as limit values, failure frequencies, and consequences have been reviewed. For calculating the individual risk, uncertainty regarding modelling, input parameters and operational practices needs to be carefully managed. The high frequency of CGH2-bunkering drives the risk due to an increase in the number of transfer operations and the time for the system in operation.